HomeMy Public PortalAbout20190909 - Planning Board - AgendaHOPKINTON PLANNING BOARD
Monday, September 9, 2019 7:00 P.M.
Hopkinton Public Library, 13 Main Street, Hopkinton, MA
Large Event Room
AGENDA
NOTE: NEW MEETING LOCATION
1.Administrative Items
a.Planning Board Member Appointment discussion
b.Zoning Advisory Committee Appointments
i.One (1) at-large applicant - Sundar Sivaraman
c.Planning Board Representative to Community Preservation Committee
Appointment
d.Legacy Farms North Bus Stop Issue
e.Legacy Farms Road/East Main Street Traffic Light Status
f.Discussion of New Sidewalk Survey
g.Growth Study Committee Membership and Discussion
i.Alternates
ii.Ex-officio positions
h.Approval of Minutes - July 22, 2019
2.Continued Public Hearings - Whisper Way OSLPD (Whisper Way/Wood Street) - 1)
Amendment to Special Permit Concept Plan; 2) Definitive Subdivision Plan - 20th Century
Homes
Proposed 12-lot single family subdivision - 1) proposed amendment to Special Permit Concept
Plan reducing the number of building lots to 12; 2) revised definitive subdivision plan
3.Continued Public Hearings - 76 Main Street - 1) Site Plan Review and 2) Flexible
Community Development (FCD) Special Permit - REC Hopkinton LLC
Major Project Site Plan Review - Proposed construction of a 3-story mixed use building with
commercial and residential uses; Proposed approval of a Special Permit relative to the Flexible
Community Development Bylaw, where 2 of the 26 residential units are required to be affordable.
REQUEST TO WITHDRAW
4.Local Action Unit Application Discussion and Recommendation to Select Board -
Chamberlain-Whalen Subdivision - REC Hopkinton, LLC
The Select Board has asked the Planning Board to review and provide feedback regarding the
Local Action Unit application to the Department of Housing and Community Development for
the affordable units to be provided off-site in order to satisfy the requirement for the
Chamberlain-Whalen subdivision.
5.Continued Public Hearing - 97-99 South Street - Minor Site Plan Review - Southfield
Properties I, LLC
Proposed building and site modifications.
HOPKINTON PLANNING BOARD
Monday, September 9, 2019 7:00 P.M.
Hopkinton Public Library, 13 Main Street, Hopkinton, MA
Large Event Room
AGENDA
6.Continued Public Hearing - Maspenock Woods (West Elm Street) - Maspenock Woods
Realty Trust
Proposed amendments to the Special Permit and approved Site Plan pursuant to the Garden
Apartments in Residential Districts Bylaw, to allow demolition and replacement of the existing
dwelling at 5 West Elm Street
7.Continued Public Hearings - LNG Line Replacement (Eversource Energy): 1) Stormwater
Management Permit, 2) Earth Removal Permit
Proposed installation of a natural gas utility pipeline through Hopkinton, replacing the existing
pipeline. The subject property is located on Assessors Map R8-38-0, R8-39-0, R9-5-0, R9-6-0,
R9-6-A, R9-6-B, R9-6-H, R9-14-0, R9-14-B, R13-8-1, and U7-7-0.
8.New Public Hearing – Cross Street – Scenic Road Permit - Eversource Energy
For work in the right of way of Cross Street,a scenic road,approximately 450 ft.north of the
intersection with Frankland Road.The proposed work involves the temporary removal of an
approximately 5 ft. section of stone wall within the existing pipeline easement.
9.New Public Hearing - 223 Pond Street - Scenic Road Permit - Christine and Andre Navez
For work in the right of way of Pond Street,a scenic road,involving the temporary removal of
approximately 15 ft.of stone wall to allow access for the installation of new septic tanks at 223
Pond Street.
10.New Public Hearing - Elmwood Farms III - Off Adams Street, Myrtle Avenue, and Fitch
Avenue - Amendment to Definitive Subdivision Plan - Abbott Realty Trust
The proposed amendment would reconfigure the remaining unbuilt section of the subdivision and
reduce the number of lots from 59 to 51.
11.New Public Hearing - 57 Hayden Rowe - Major Site Plan Review - Keefe Chesmore,
Chesmore Funeral Home and Cremation Services, Inc.
Work proposed is for additions/improvements and associated site work.
Business to be considered by the Board at any time during the meeting:
●Legacy Farms North Bus Stop Issue
●Lumber Street/West Main Street improvements
●Legacy Farms North (Section formerly known as Rafferty Road) - Discussion about disrepair
●Peloquin Estates - No-cut easements
●Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness and Climate Change discussion
●Affordable housing/payments-in-lieu/off-site units discussion
●Future agenda items, correspondence
Town of Hopkinton
Department of Land Use, Planning and Permitting
18 Main Street, Hopkinton MA 01748
(508) 497-9745
DATE: September 5, 2019
TO: Planning Board
FROM: John Gelcich, Principal Planner
RE: Items on Planning Board Agenda, September 9, 2019
Contents:
1.Administrative Items
1.1.Planning Board Member Appointment Discussion
1.2.Zoning Advisory Committee Appointments
1.2.1.Sundar Sivaraman
1.3.Planning Board Rep to Community Preservation Committee (CPC)
appointment
1.4.Legacy Farms North Bus Stop Issue
1.5.Legacy Farms North/East Main Street Traffic Light Status
1.6.Discussion of New Sidewalk Survey
1.7.Growth Study Committee
1.7.1.Alternates
1.7.2.Ex-officio members
1.8.Approval of Minutes - July 22, 2019
2.Whisper Way OSLPD (Whisper Way/Wood Street)-1)Amendment to Special Permit
Concept Plan; 2) Definitive Subdivision Plan - 20th Century Homes
3.76 Main Street -1)Site Plan Review and 2)Flexible Community Development (FCD)
Special Permit - REC Hopkinton LLC
4.Local Action Unit Application Discussion and Recommendation to Select Board -
Chamberlain-Whalen Subdivision - REC Hopkinton LLC
5.97-99 South Street - Minor Site Plan Review - Southfield Properties I, LLC
6.Maspenock Woods (West Elm Street) - Maspenock Woods Realty Trust
7.LNG Line Replacement -1)Stormwater Management Permit and 2)Earth Removal
Permit - Eversource Energy
8.Cross Street - Scenic Road Permit - Eversource Energy
9.223 Pond Street - Scenic Road Permit - Christine and Andre Navez
1
10.Elmwood Farms III -Off Adams Street,Myrtle Avenue,and Fitch Avenue -
Amendment to Definitive Subdivision Plan - Abbott Realty Trust
11.57 Hayden Rowe -Major Site Plan Review -Chesmore Funeral Home and Cremation
Services, Inc.
12.Zoning Board of Appeals Notices
13.Next Meetings
1.0 Administrative Items
1.1.Planning Board Member Appointment Discussion
The following applicants have asked to be considered for the vacant Planning
Board seat (as of 9/5/19):
●Jane Moran
●Mary Arnaut
●Mike McNamara
●Smriti Choudhury
These applications are attached as part of this memo.It should be noted that
we have been advised by the Town Clerk that there is no effective deadline for
this application process,therefore someone could request to be considered at
the meeting on September 10th.
1.2.Zoning Advisory Committee Appointments
Sundar Sivaraman has submitted an application to be considered for the open
At-large seat on the Zoning Advisory Committee.His application is attached as
part of this memo.
1.3.Planning Board Rep to Community Preservation Committee (CPC)
appointment
Currently,Gary Trendel is serving as the Planning Board representative to the
Community Preservation Committee (CPC).However,his term (1 year)has
ended and a new representative (or Gary again) needs to be reappointed.
1.4.Legacy Farms North Bus Stop Issue
An on-site meeting is to be held on September 5 to discuss options to address
the safety issue at the bus stop.An update to the Board will be presented at the
Planning Board meeting.
A letter from Kathleen Towner was submitted to the Planning Board to be
included as part of the record for this issue. This letter is attached to this memo.
1.5.Legacy Farms North/East Main Street Traffic Light Status
Several members of the public have reached out about the traffic light status at
the intersection of Legacy Farms North/South and East Main Street.Baystone
(Roy MacDowell)has submitted 75%drawings to the Principal Planner,BETA,
and John Westerling (DPW).The next step is to review the documents internally
and provide feedback in order to progress to 100% drawings.
2
1.6.Discussion of New Sidewalk Survey
John Westerling,DPW Director said that he has had a couple of people ask about
new sidewalk construction for next year's budget.The two previous attempts at
funding for new sidewalks have not been successful.He said some have claimed
that the results of the most recent Planning Board survey no longer meet the
needs of the community.He is asking whether the Planning Board has
considered conducting another survey and bringing forward a funding request
for new sidewalks.
May push to next meeting.
1.7.Growth Study Committee
A determination was made that the alternate positions for the Growth Study
Committee were not properly advertised before appointments were made.
Additionally,the role of the Alternates was not made clear,with respect to when
the position would participate in votes.Discussion is also proposed to determine
whether ex-officio positions should be established.
1.8.Approval of Minutes - July 22, 2019
2.0 Whisper Way OSLPD (Whisper Way/Wood Street)-1)Amendment to Special
Permit Concept Plan; 2) Definitive Subdivision Plan - 20th Century Homes
2.1.Background
20th Century Homes has requested that the application before the Board be
withdrawn and replaced with a similar application showing some minor revisions
to the layout of the site.According to the Applicant,the revisions of note
include:
●Changing the layout of the parcels so that all but two lots (Lots 5 and 6)
meet the lot frontage depth; and
●Removal of the spur on Lot 12 to access the adjacent lot through the
open space.
The reason for the withdrawal and resubmission is to allow for Planning Board
members who have been disqualified from voting due to missing meetings or
being seated on the Board after deliberations were undertaken for the project to
participate and become eligible to vote.We have spoken to Town Counsel about
this and have been advised that this procedure is allowed.The “new”application
has been duly noticed and the Applicant will need to give a short presentation to
bring all Board members up to speed on the current proposal.
2.1.1.Regulatory Review
§210-109 Permitted Uses
The proposed development proposes detached single-family dwellings,
which are a permitted use under this section.
3
§210-110 Minimum Requirements
The proposed tract is 31.2 acres and therefore meets the minimum
required tract size (10 acres).
The density of development is determined through a yield plan prepared
by the Applicant,which is discussed above,showing 12 lots.Additionally,
a formula can be used to determine lots.The Applicant has performed
this calculation as shown on the sheet entitled “Open Space Plan”of the
Revised Definitive Plan and Amended Concept Plan package.Using the
denominator for the Agricultural District (the more restrictive number of
the two), the Applicant has determined that 19 lots may be constructed.
§210-111 Intensity Regulations
Lot frontage depth may be waived by the Planning Board.The Applicant
has requested a waiver from this requirement.BETA has previously
recommended that the Applicant identify which lots will need this waiver.
The OSLPD allows for dead-end streets within the district,with a
maximum road length of 1,000 feet.
Common driveways are permitted within the OSLPD.Please refer to
BETA’s review letter for comments regarding the proposed common
driveways.
§210-112 Development Standards
A.Concept plan standards.Prior to the issuance of a special permit
for an open space and landscape preservation development,the
applicant shall submit the information necessary to demonstrate
that the following standards have been met:
(1)The development will not cause unreasonable traffic
congestion or unsafe conditions both within and outside of the
development.
(2)The development will provide for and maintain convenient and
safe emergency vehicle access to all buildings and structures at
all times.
(3)The site design shall preserve and,where possible,enhance
the historic and natural features of the property,including
scenic views,by adapting the location and placement of
structures and ways to the existing topography in order to
minimize the amount of soil removal,tree cutting and general
disturbance to the landscape and surrounding properties.
(4)The site design shall identify and ensure preservation of
significant and special historic and natural features,and use of
§210-117.2,Lots with Historic Structures,shall be considered
as a mechanism to do so, where appropriate.
B.Definitive plan standards.Prior to the approval of a definitive plan
based upon the open space and landscape preservation concept
4
plan,the applicant shall submit the information necessary to
demonstrate that the following standards have been met.These
standards are in addition to the requirements of the Hopkinton
Subdivision Rules and Regulations and are in no way intended to
replace any portion of those regulations.
(1)The nature of the soils and subsoils shall be suited for the
intended purposes based upon the Soil Conservation
Guidelines.This determination shall focus upon but shall not
be limited to the locations,design and construction of
roadways,buildings and surface water drainage systems.Soil
borings or test pits may be made to provide information on
soil texture,color,percolation rates and depth to the
groundwater table at its maximum elevation.
(2)Anticipated storm water runoff from the site shall not exceed
peak runoff from the site prior to development.The applicant
shall submit formal drainage calculations by a registered
professional engineer for this purpose.
(3)Proper soil erosion and sedimentation control measures shall
be employed to prevent sedimentation and siltation of existing
surface water bodies and wetlands.In areas where the land
slopes downward toward any surface water body or
freshwater wetland,proposed filling,cutting,clearing or
grading shall be minimized and all such development activities
shall be carried out in such a way as to retain the natural
vegetation and topography wherever possible.The Planning
Board may require that an erosion and sedimentation control
plan be submitted if significant erosion is anticipated in slope
areas.
§210-113 Open Space Use and Design Standards
The minimum required amount of open spaces for an OSLPD
development is 50%of the land area.The Applicant proposes ±20.99
acres of open space on a tract of ±40.18 acres,resulting in an open space
ratio of 52.23%, meeting the minimum required size.
Additional standards are below:
The common open space shall be designed and maintained in
accordance with the following standards:
(1)Areas to remain as naturally existing woods,fields,meadows and
wetlands shall be maintained and may be improved in accordance
with good conservation practices.
(2)Common open space shall be planned as large,contiguous units
wherever possible.Strips of narrow parcels of common open
space shall be permitted only when necessary for access or as
vegetated buffers along the site's perimeter.
(3)Common open space may be in more than one parcel,provided
that the size,shape and location of such parcels are suitable for
the designated uses.
5
(4)No more than 20%of the common open space shall be covered by
man-made impervious surfaces.
(5)Common open space may be used for active and passive
recreation,conservation,forestry,agriculture,natural buffers,
structures necessary for approved uses,utilities and other
facilities necessary for the convenience and enjoyment of the
residents, subject to approval by the Planning Board.
(6)If detention and/or retention ponds are necessary for the
construction of the improvements shown on the subdivision plan,
such detention and/or retention ponds shall not be located within
the common open space shown on such plan.The Planning Board
may waive this requirement if the Board finds that the integrity
and significance of the open space and the benefit of the open
space to the Town are not compromised,and that the open space
created conforms with the intent and purpose of this article.In no
case,however,shall permanent clearing for drainage
improvements or utilities,including detention and/or retention
ponds, exceed 5% of any common open space parcel.
Buffer areas.
(1)There shall be a buffer at the perimeter of the site consisting of
trees,shrubs,vegetation and topographic features sufficient to
separate and/or screen the development from abutting
properties.This buffer shall be no less than 100 feet in width.The
buffer shall be considered common open space.Upon a finding by
the Planning Board that a buffer of lesser width would be
sufficient to screen and/or separate the development from
adjacent property,or would allow a historic structure to be
preserved the buffer may be reduced.If,however,the perimeter
of the site abuts a Business (B),Downtown Business (BD),Rural
Business (BR)or Industrial A (IA)or Industrial B (IB)zoning district,
the Planning Board may require the buffer area abutting a B,BR,
IA or IB District to be greater than 100 feet in order to ensure
adequate separation and/or screening from the abutting
commercial zoning districts.
(2)The Board may require no-cut easements,conservation
restrictions or the like where the buffer requirement has been
reduced.These easements and restrictions shall be on private
property,shall not be considered a buffer and shall not be
included in common open space calculations.
(3)Retention and/or detention ponds may be permitted in the buffer
area upon approval of the Planning Board.Structures shall not be
permitted in the buffer area.
(4)Buffer areas shall remain substantially in their current natural
state;provided,however,that such areas may include new trails
and trailhead parking areas as may be approved by the Planning
Board.
6
2.2.Relevant Materials for this Meeting
●Whisper Way OSLPD Plans, dated 5/24/19, revised 9/3/19
○Too large to email, linked here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dG5eavZd7EVYMthLLzxmi98CPnw2F
OL_/view?usp=sharing
●Email from BETA, dated 9/3/19
●Lot Shape Factor Plan, dated 8/1/19
●Stormwater Report, dated 9/3/19
●Long-term Operations and Maintenance Plan, dated 8/30/19
●DRAFT Special Permit Decision, dated 9/3/19
2.3.Comments Received
Principal Planner Comments:
The Applicant,BETA,and I have gone back and forth with several of the
aforementioned documents in the time between the last meeting of the
Planning Board on this application and the present time.At this time,it is
believed that all issues brought up by BETA have been addressed by the
Applicant in the plans,with the exception of the approval of driveway layout by
the Fire Department,which is included as a condition of approval in the draft
decision.
The Planning Board previously approved all requested waivers for the project.
2.4.Public Hearing Outline
1.Project introduction and review - Applicant
2.Staff Report
3.Consultant Review
4.Planning Board members and Public – Add to Detailed Discussion items
5.Detailed Discussion, with Public Comment for each topic
5.1.Vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow;truck traffic flow;
emergency vehicle access
5.2.Intended uses
5.3.Stormwater management
5.4.Site lighting
5.5.Utilities; Water/Sewer use
5.6.Parking lot layout;dumpster location;snow storage/snow
removal
5.7.Noise; HVAC/exhaust systems; Screening of HVAC (if applicable)
5.8.Crosswalk location; Sidewalks
5.9.Building design and landscaping
5.10.Signage
5.11.Solar Panels/alternative energy
5.12.Impacts on:1)schools;2)other municipal services;3)value of
neighboring residential properties
5.13.Town Department and Board/Committee Comments not
covered above
6.Additional or New Comments and Information
7.Standards/Findings
7
7.1.Discuss Special Permit findings
7.2.Discuss findings and standards for other approvals
8.Discuss/vote on waivers
9.Discuss conditions of approval
10.Final public comment
11.Vote to close public hearing
12.Vote on Special Permit and Definitive Subdivision Plan
2.5.Decision Criteria
2.5.1.OSLPD Special Permit
§210-115.A.(3) Special permit criteria.
The special permit shall be granted only if the Planning Board finds each
of the following:
(a)The development meets the purpose of an open space and
landscape preservation development as described in §210-106.
Principal Planner Comment: This is understood to be true.
(b)The development standards contained in §210-112A(1)through
(4)have been met.Principal Planner Comment:This is
understood to be true.
(c)The common open space is designed in accordance with the
standards set forth in §210-113B.Principal Planner Comment:
This is understood to be true.
(d)The common open space is designed in accordance with the
standards set forth in §210-113C.Principal Planner Comment:
This is understood to be true.
(e)The parcel could be developed as a conventional subdivision
under existing local,state and federal land use regulations.
Principal Planner Comment: This is understood to be true.
(f)The open space and landscape preservation development
provides for efficient use and delivery of municipal and other
services and infrastructure.Principal Planner Comment:This is
understood to be true.
2.5.2.Definitive Subdivision Plan
§210-115.B.(1) Definitive Plan
If the open space and landscape preservation development special
permit is granted,the applicant shall submit a plan in conformity with the
requirements and procedures for definitive plan submission and review
under the Subdivision Rules and Regulations of the Planning Board.In
accordance with MGL c.41,§81R,the applicant may request a waiver
from the Subdivision Rules and Regulations if such action is in the public
interest and consistent with the intent and purposes of this article,the
Subdivision Control Law,and the special permit.The Planning Board then
shall review the aspects of the open space and landscape preservation
development with regard to its compliance to the Subdivision Control
Law,and hold a public hearing as required by MGL c.41,§81T.The
overall concept shall only be reconsidered if there is substantial variation
between the definitive plan and the concept plan.A substantial variation
8
shall be defined as an increase in the number of lots,a decrease in the
open space acreage,a change in the layout which causes dwelling units
or roadways to be placed closer to a dwelling unit within 500 feet of the
project and/or a change in the development pattern which adversely
affects natural landscape features and open space.If the Planning Board
finds that a substantial variation exists,it must hold a public hearing on
the modifications of the concept plan.
2.6.Board Actions
The Planning Board’s actions for the two applications are as follows:
●For Amendment to OSLPD Special Permit -Decision due 90 days after the
close of the public hearing.A ⅔vote is required to approve the Special
Permit amendment. All members are eligible to vote.
●For Definitive Subdivision Plan -Decision due 10/20/19.A majority vote
of the Board is required for approval. All members are eligible to vote.
The Applicant has requested an amendment to the previously-issued OSLPD
Special Permit,which,given the reduction of lots currently proposed,will need to
be reviewed and decided prior to a decision on the revised definitive subdivision
plan,as the subdivision plan could not be executed without the amendment to
the Special Permit.As such,it is recommended that the Board proceed with the
Special Permit amendment prior to the subdivision plan.
2.7.Other
2.7.1.Requested Waivers
All requested waivers for this proposal were approved by the Planning
Board at the 8/12/19 meeting.
2.7.2.Proposed Conditions
All proposed conditions should be captured in the draft decision,
including those that were recently recommended by BETA.
3.0 76 Main Street -1)Site Plan Review and 2)Flexible Community Development (FCD)
Special Permit - REC Hopkinton LLC
The Applicant has requested that this application be withdrawn.An email with this
request is attached as part of this memo.The Planning Board should vote whether to
allow the withdrawal.
4.0 Local Action Unit Application Discussion and Recommendation to Select Board -
Chamberlain-Whalen Subdivision - REC Hopkinton LLC
The Applicant has withdrawn this application until the time when the units have been
identified. No action is required on the part of the Planning Board.
9
5.0 97-99 South Street - Minor Site Plan Review - Southfield Properties I, LLC
5.1.Background
The facility was originally permitted and constructed more than thirty-five (35)
years ago.The facility is a one story flex office building with associated parking
areas,access driveway and pedestrian walkways.The facility is serviced by
municipal water and municipal sanitary sewer.
The proposed changes to the site, as described by the Applicant include:
Building changes:
●Internal changes have resulted in a complete "gutting out"of the building
interior.Internal office spaces,labs and clean rooms,conference rooms
and meeting rooms and rest rooms are proposed for the facility
●Exterior changes proposed include modernizing and enlarging two
existing entry ways along the southerly side of the facility;replacement of
the roofing membrane;replacement of rooftop mechanical equipment;
replacement of all exterior framing and window glass;addition of metallic
panels above the window line on three sides of the facility.
Site changes:
●Changes to the new westerly entrance have resulted in the removal of
three parking spaces.
●A new configuration for the pedestrian walkway near the revised
entrances has been developed.
●The existing water service will be extended to allow for the placement of a
fire hydrant to increase fire fighting capabilities at the facility.
●Existing parking light poles and fixtures will be replaced with shorter light
poles and lighting fixtures mandated by Town of Hopkinton Planning
Board requirements.The lighting fixtures will be designed to direct site
lighting to appropriate locations and eliminate light spillage beyond site
boundaries.
●Additional landscape areas and materials will be added to the project site
at locations near the front entrance,existing traffic islands and other
areas around the facility.The existing traffic islands will be reviewed and
any damaged curbing will be repaired or replaced as needed.The well fed
irrigation system will be extended to include the traffic islands and areas
at the front of the building to ensure proper growth of existing and
proposed landscape materials.
●The existing parking lot and driveway surfaces will be scarified,milled or
excavated and replaced to facilitate the placement of a new parking lot
surface.Parking space striping,crosswalk striping and directional striping
will be added to the new surface to create a similar traffic and parking
pattern to what currently exists at the facility.Parking lot and driveway
10
grades will be recreated to ensure storm water flows reach facilities in a
manner that replicates the current condition.
5.2.Regulatory Review
The proposed work appears (and the Director of Municipal Inspections has
agreed)to be categorized as a minor Site Plan Review project.The work does
not involve an increase of gross floor area (GFA)of more than 5,000 square feet,
nor does it involve the construction,enlargement,or alteration of a parking area
containing five or more parking spaces.
5.3.Relevant Materials for this Meeting
●Site Plan Application Package, dated 7/19/19
●Lighting Details, dated 8/13/19
●Lighting Plan, dated 8/13/19
●Construction Plans, dated 9/3/19
○Too large to email, linked here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15X3UyQVb1WfYKUGxys2VNdxVHJ4Os
DxT/view?usp=sharing
●Letter from Joe Marquedant regarding changes based on Conservation
Commission Review, dated 9/3/19
●Snow Storage plan, dated 9/3/19
●Inspection and Maintenance Plan, dated 9/3/19
●Email from Hopkinton DPW, dated 7/26/19
●Recommendation from the Design Review Board, dated 8/22/19
5.4.Comments Received
The DRB made the following comments:
●The Board acknowledged the Applicant’s statement that the Applicant will
need to reappear before the Design Review Board for the on-site signs
when appropriate;
●The Applicant confirmed that snow stakes would be utilized in order to
better preserve the health of the trees with regard to snow plowing.
5.5.Decision Criteria
Conformance with Site Plan standards.
5.6.Public Hearing Outline
None.
5.7.Board Actions
The Board’s votes on the submitted materials will consist of:
●For the Site Plan Amendment -Decision is due 90 days after the close of
the public hearing and a simple majority vote is required for approval.All
members are eligible to vote.
11
5.8.Other
None.
6.0 Maspenock Woods -Proposed amendments to Special Permit and Site Plan
Approval for demolition and replacement of existing dwelling unit at 5 West Elm
Street
6.1.Background
The Applicant has requested that the Planning Board continue this hearing.
The application described below was submitted to the Board on October 31,
2018 (modified March 7,2019 to include a request to amend the Special Permit),
April 10,2019,and May 14,2019.The minor site plan modifications to units 21,
22, 23, and 24 was approved by the Planning Board previously.
●Public hearing for proposed amendments to Special Permit and Site Plan
Approval -Garden Apartments in Residential Districts (Article XIII).The
applicant proposes to modify the previously granted waiver for house
location for the dwelling unit at 5 West Elm Street,to be located
approximately 50 feet from West Elm Street and 27.2 feet from the
northern property line.The applicant proposes to demolish the existing
dwelling unit and rebuild a single dwelling unit in its place,in a different
location on the site.
The previous decision (dated December 20,2005)approved a waiver of the
100-foot setback for buildings (allowed for reduction to 75 feet).A second
waiver,for the setback requirements for 5 West Elm Street specifically,was
granted to allow for retention of the existing house in its present location.The
setback for the side yard was determined to be 48 feet.
6.2.Regulatory Review
Setback Requirements of Garden Apartments in Residential District
(“GARD”) (§210-74.B.(7)) (emphasis added):
All buildings must be located a minimum of 100 feet from any side or rear lot line
and 100 feet from any established street layout or,where applicable,any defined
street line of a public road,which street setback area shall be undeveloped and/or
landscaped.Upon a finding by the Planning Board that a setback of lesser width
would be sufficient to screen and/or separate the development from adjacent
property,or would allow a historic structure to be preserved,the setback may
be reduced.The Board may require no-cut easements,conservation restrictions,
historic preservation restrictions or the like where the setback has been reduced.
Buildings shall be located a minimum of 20 feet from interior roadways and
driveways which are not considered streets or public roads.
The underlying zoning of the site is the Residential B (RB)district.The
requirements of the GARD supersede the requirements of the RB,however,this
12
dimensional information is provided for informational purposes.The setback
requirements of this district are detailed below:
Minimum setback from the street line:50 feet
Minimum side yard width:25 feet
Minimum rear yard width: 20 feet
6.3.Relevant Materials for this Meeting
●No new information has been submitted
6.4.Comments Received
Board of Health Comments:
The Board of Health submitted a letter dated June 10,2019 stating the following
comments:
Provided that the next changes in area do not reduce and/or negatively impact any
previously approved regulatory offsets, the Department has no comment.
The Department looks forward to a review of the site development plans for 5 West
Elm Street.
6.5.Public Hearing Outline
1.Project introduction and review - Applicant
2.Staff Report
3.Consultant Review
4.Planning Board members and Public – Add to Detailed Discussion items
5.Detailed Discussion, with Public Comment for each topic
5.1.Vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow; truck traffic flow;
emergency vehicle access
5.2.Intended uses
5.3.Stormwater management
5.4.Site lighting
5.5.Utilities; Water/Sewer use
5.6.Parking lot layout; dumpster location; snow storage/snow
removal
5.7.Noise; HVAC/exhaust systems; Screening of HVAC (if
applicable)
5.8.Crosswalk location; Sidewalks
5.9.Building design and landscaping
5.10.Historic Structures (if applicable)
5.11.Signage
5.12.Solar Panels/alternative energy
5.13.Affordable Housing Units (if applicable)
5.14.Impacts on: 1) schools; 2) other municipal services; 3) value of
neighboring residential properties
13
5.15.Town Department and Board/Committee Comments not
covered above
6.Additional or New Comments and Information
7.Standards/Findings
7.1.Discuss Site Plan standards and plan revisions to be made (if
applicable)
7.2.Discuss Special Permit findings (if applicable)
7.3.Discuss findings and standards for other approvals (if
applicable)
8.Discuss/Vote on waivers (if applicable)
9.Discuss conditions of approval
10.Final public comment
11.Vote to close public hearing
12.Vote on Permits being requested
6.6.Decision Criteria
Special Permit Approval Criteria (§210-75.A.(1)(d))
Approval criteria.Before the Planning Board may issue the special permit,it shall
determine each of the following:
1.That the proposed development constitutes a desirable development in
the neighborhood and in the town.
2.That the proposed development will not be detrimental to the
neighborhood or the town.
3.That the plans generally provide adequately for convenience and safety
of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and in relation to
adjacent streets,property or improvements,with the understanding that
review of such items will be more detailed at the site plan stage.
4.That the plans appear to provide adequate methods of disposal of
sewerage,refuse and other wastes,adequate methods for drainage for
surface water and seasonal flooding,if any,and adequate provision of
water for domestic purposes,with the understanding that review of such
items will be more detailed at the site plan stage.
5.That the plan complies with the Master Plan.
6.That the provisions of § 210-72A and B of this article have been met.
7.That the Town of Hopkinton has not met the statutory goal to provide
10%of its housing stock as affordable housing pursuant to Sections 20
through 23 of Chapter 40B of the Massachusetts General laws.Note:
This criterion was adopted after the project was approved,therefore
this does not apply to this project.
For previous amendments voted by the Board,it was determined that if
proposed changes to the project did not affect or modify these items,then the
criteria continued to be met (or not met, if applicable).
Site Plan Approval Criteria (§210-75.A.(2)(d))
Approval criteria.
14
1.Before the Planning Board may approve the site plan,it shall determine
each of the following:
a.That the plans provide adequately for convenience and safety of
vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and in relation to
adjacent streets, property or improvements.
b.That the plans assure the adequacy of the methods of disposal of
sewerage,refuse and other wastes and the methods of drainage for
surface water and seasonal flooding, if any.
c.All of the provisions of this Chapter,including §210-72A and B,have
been complied with and all necessary special permits and variances
have been granted from the Board of Appeals.
2.If the Planning Board does not make all of the above determinations,it
shall deny the application stating its reasons for such denial.
Pursuant to §210-75.B.,the approved garden apartment site plan may be
modified or amended by the Planning Board on its own motion or,as with this
case,upon application by the developer.If the Board determines that such
modifications are significant,it shall hold a public hearing in accordance with the
requirements and process of a new site plan submission,as set forth in
§210-75.A.(2).The Board should determine whether the modifications proposed
are considered significant.If so determined,the project will be advertised and
noticed as required.If determined not to be significant,the Board is able to
approve the changes at this hearing.
6.7.Board Actions
The application before the Board with regard to the advertised public hearing is
for an amendment to the Special Permit for the GARD and an amendment to the
Site Plan Approval for the relocation of the dwelling unit at 5 West Elm Street.
●A modification of the Special Permit requires a two-thirds vote of the
Board (6 votes). Deb Fein-Brug is not eligible to vote.
●A modification of the Site Plan Approval requires a majority vote of the
Board (5 votes). Deb Fein-Brug is not eligible to vote.
7.0 LNG Line Replacement -1)Stormwater Management Permit,2)Earth Removal
Permit - Eversource Energy
7.1.Background
The proposed project involves the installation of a 12-inch gas line to replace the
existing 6-inch gas line within Hopkinton.Approximately 1.1 miles of pipe are
proposed to be replaced.Approximately 3.71 miles of pipe is proposed to be
replaced in total,including the work proposed in Ashland.The 12-inch pipe is
proposed to be buried.
From the Applicant:
The Transfer Line is an existing,high-pressure distribution pipeline that runs from
Eversource’s Wilson Street Gate Station in Hopkinton to the Pond Street Gate Station
15
in Ashland within an existing 20 –30-foot-wide permanent easement.This
approximately 25,000-foot-long pipeline includes approximately 2,200 feet of 12-inch
diameter pipe on the Hopkinton end (west),approximately 3,100 feet of 12-inch
diameter pipe on the Ashland end (east)and approximately 19,600 feet of 6-inch
diameter between the two 12-inch sections.The 6-inch diameter section of pipeline is
the subject of this replacement project.
The project is subject to the Town of Hopkinton Stormwater Control Bylaw and
Stormwater Regulations as it is proposed that more than one acre of land is to
be disturbed as part of this work.The proposed work is not anticipated to
remove more than 500 cubic yards of soil,however,the Applicant has applied
for an earth removal permit to ensure adequate coverage during construction,
should this threshold be exceeded.
The Applicant has stated that,“given the incremental and phased construction
approach that will take place over a two-year period in Hopkinton,the Company does
not anticipate having more than one (1)acre of earth disturbed at any one time.”
However,it was the determination of the Land Use Department that the
disturbance amount in the Bylaw is cumulative and not determined by what is
currently disturbed at any one time.
7.2.Regulatory Review
The proposed work is subject to the Stormwater Management and Erosion
Control Bylaw (Chapter 172) and the Earth Removal Bylaw (Chapter 96).
Chapter 172, Stormwater Management and Erosion Control
The proposed work must comply with the Stormwater Regulations,adopted in
2008 and revised in 2014.
Chapter 96, Earth Removal
The proposed work shall comply with all general requirements set forth in
Section 96-3, unless waived by the Planning Board.
7.3.Relevant Materials for this Meeting
●Application for SMP and Earth Removal, dated 6/5/19
○Too large to email, linked here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Yu9w67emAeV-PP6kFSI635wjSj7pvhK
A/view?usp=sharing
●BETA Stormwater Review Letter, dated 7/8/19
●Letter from Board of Health, dated 7/11/19
●Email from John Westerling, DPW, dated 6/17/19
●Email from Rebekah Lacey, Town Counsel, dated 7/15/19
●Applicant Presentation from meeting on 7/22/19
●Response from Applicant to Town Counsel Comments, dated 8/30/19
●Email from Brendan Tedstone, dated 8/19/19
7.4.Comments Received
16
A comment review letter from BETA,dated 7/8/19,provided the following
comments:
E1.Provide a plan outlining anticipated truck routes.(Earth Removal
Requirements)
SW1.BETA recommends a condition that requires the submission of the signed
SWPPP prior to commencement of construction. (Standard 8)
SW2.BETA recommends a condition that requires the submission of SWPPP
inspection reports to the Planning Board. (Standard 8)
SW3. Documents submitted indicate that the contactor is responsible to
a. Provide restoration inspection reports to the Planning Board until site is
Stabilized.
b. Notify the Planning Board when the site is stabilized.
BETA recommends these be included as conditions. (Standard 8)
SW4. Provide a signed statement prior to construction. (Standard 10)
A letter from the Hopkinton Health Department included the following
comments:
●During permitted activity at the site,sanitary facilities must be provided,
in adequate number and with proper frequency of service to address the
sanitary and hygienic needs of the workforce.Permit for portable toilets
may be obtained from the Health Department.
●Portable toilets must be serviced by a waste hauler permitted by the
Town of Hopkinton.
●To remove the oil and/or hazardous waste and waste residues contained
in the pipeline scheduled for abandonment,the pipeline must be
pumped and flushed prior to abandonment.
●Soils and/or surface materials impacted during pumping and flushing
must be securely stockpiled until they can be removed for permitted
disposal.
●The wastes,waste liquids and contaminated soils generated during the
pumpline abandonment must be contained,manifested and transported
for offsite disposal in accordance with appropriate local,State and
Federal regulations.
●To limit nuisance dust and noise,adequate control measures must be
implemented and maintained throughout the duration of the project.
17
●Work activities must be completed in accordance with the Town of
Hopkinton Bylaw requirements for earth removal,use of construction
equipment and construction waste or debris.
An email from John Westerling,DPW Director included the comment that he asks
Eversource to notify abutters of the work.
An email from Rebekah Lacey, Town Counsel included the following comments:
Earth Removal Permit Application
1.Section 96-5(3)of the Earth Removal Bylaw states that “[a]n applicant
shall submit adequate evidence of ownership or authority to seek the
permit.”No copy of,or Book and Page reference for,Eversource’s
easement was provided in the application.An online article refers to an
“order-of-taking document made by Northeastern Transmission Gas Co.
in 1951,”but we could not locate the document via the Registry of Deeds
online search function.Eversource should provide the relevant
document(s) so that the extent of its property rights can be understood.
2.Eversource needs (but did not request)a waiver of the requirements at
§96-3.E (depth to groundwater) and H (100-foot buffer strip).
3.Eversource states in Section 1.0 of the application narrative,“Although
the exact volume of off-site soil disposal is not known at this time,it is
anticipated to be below the 500 cubic yard threshold for Surplus Earth at
§96-4(A.)(3)of the Town of Hopkinton’s Earth Removal Bylaw.”However,
BETA’s peer review estimates that the project will generate approximately
1300 cubic yards of surplus earth.Eversource should provide more
detailed information about the generation and disposal of surplus earth.
4.The Planning Board should consider whether “retiring”the existing pipe
in place (as proposed in Eversource’s application) is acceptable.
5.Eversource provided minimal information about traffic control and
roadway excavation safety measures,necessary for the Planning Board to
evaluate the permit criterion at §96-6.B(2)(d)(“The earth removal activity
will not result in traffic conditions on roads in the area of the earth
removal activity which will cause unsafe and dangerous conditions.”).We
recommend that the Planning Board require that Eversource submit a
Traffic Management Plan and a Street Opening Plan and make approval
of those plans by the relevant Town authorities and compliance with the
approved plans a condition of the permit.
6.In addition to the above,we recommend that the Planning Board include
all of the conditions included in the liquefaction facility ERP (modified as
appropriate to this permit).
Stormwater Management Permit Application
18
1.We agree with the recommendations made in BETA’s peer review.
2.We recommend that conditions similar to the ones included in the
liquefaction facility SWMP be included in this permit.
3.We suggest that the Planning Board require Eversource to pay for a
consultant to work on behalf of the Town performing site inspections and
monitoring compliance with the permit,as provided for in Section 6.C.2 of
the Hopkinton Stormwater Regulations.
The Applicant has submitted a letter addressing the comments from all Town
bodies as set forth above.As a result of this,the Applicant has requested
additional relief for the proposed project.
7.5.Decision Criteria
Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Criteria
The proposed activities must comply with the performance standards as set
forth in the Stormwater Regulations,meeting the Stormwater Management
Standards of the Massachusetts Stormwater Management Policy.
As set forth in the Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Bylaw:Unless
specifically altered in the Stormwater Regulations,stormwater
management practices that are designed,constructed,and maintained in
accordance with these design and sizing criteria will be presumed to be
protective of Massachusetts water quality standards.
Earth Removal Criteria
A.The applicant for a permit shall have the burden of proving by a
preponderance of the credible evidence that the work proposed in the
permit application will meet the requirements of this chapter.
B.Earth removal permits may be granted by the Board if it finds each of the
following:
(1)The proposed earth removal conforms to the purpose of the chapter.
(2)The earth removal operation on the permitted lot will not:
(a)Be injurious or dangerous to the public health or safety.
(b)Produce noise,dust or other effects detrimental to the normal
use of adjacent property.
(c)Have a material adverse effect on the health or safety of
persons living in the neighborhood or on the use or amenities
of adjacent land.
(d)The earth removal activity will not result in traffic conditions on
roads in the area of the earth removal activity which will cause
unsafe and dangerous conditions.
(e)The regulations contained in this chapter will be complied with.
7.6.Board Actions
●For the Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Permit,the Board
may approve,approve with conditions,disapprove based upon a
determination set forth in Section F.of the Stormwater Management
19
Regulations,or disapprove “without prejudice”.A majority vote of the
Board is required for approval.All members are eligible to vote.A
decision is due September 16, 2019.
●For Earth Removal Permit,the Board may approve,approve with
conditions,or disapprove the permit application.A majority vote of the
Board is required for approval.All members are eligible to vote.A
decision is due September 16, 2019.
7.7.Other
7.7.1.Requested Waivers
As part of the Applicant’s response to comments,the following waivers
are now being requested:
●§96.3.E Depth to Groundwater
Section §96-3.E states that the depth of excavation for any earth
removal operation shall not be closer than seven feet above the
spring high-water table,as determined by observation of soil profiles
or test wells.Given that the Project easement extends for
approximately 1.2 miles through the Town of Hopkinton in areas of
variable topography and substrate conditions,groundwater levels will
fluctuate throughout the project area.Eversource requests a waiver
because the proposed trench excavation will temporarily expose
shallow water table and will be backfilled immediately following pipe
installation with native soil material to restore the ground to
pre-construction condition.
●§96-3.H Buffer Strip
Section §96-3.H states a buffer strip of undisturbed land not less than
100 feet wide shall be maintained at all boundaries of the lot,
including at all street lines,on which an earth removal operation
occurs.In the event that an earth removal permit is issued for
adjoining lots under the same ownership,the Board may waive the
buffer strip requirement in such locations as it deems appropriate.
The Project involves construction within an existing utility easement,
which crosses multiple properties in Hopkinton over its 1.2-mile
length.The Transfer Line easement is currently maintained in a
non-forested condition to facilitate pipe inspections and other
operation needs.
Accordingly,buffer strips are not present within the easement at
property boundaries and are not consistent with the continued
operation and maintenance of the Transfer Line. That said, the Project
will temporarily disturb soils and vegetation within the easement
during construction,but once restoration is complete,vegetation will
be allowed to regrow in the easement.
7.7.2.Proposed Conditions
20
Earth Removal Permit
1.The duration of the permit shall be for 24 months,which shall
start on the date that earth removal activity commences.The
Applicant shall notify the Planning Board and the Earth Removal
Agent in writing of the commencement date,at least 48 hours in
advance.
2.Earth removal activity shall occur only between the hours of 7:00
AM to 7:00 PM Monday through Friday,and 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM on
Saturday,with traffic on public roadways limited during the school
commuting hours and in accordance with the Traffic Management
Plan to be prepared in conjunction with the Town.The Traffic
Management Plan shall be completed and in place prior to the
commencement of construction.
3.The permit is not assignable.
4.The Applicant shall post a bond or make a deposit with the Town
in the amount of $10,000 to guarantee conformity with the
provisions or conditions of the permit.The guarantee shall be
deposited with the Town prior to commencement of operations
under this permit.The Town may use the bond or deposit in the
event that the Applicant does not comply with all of the terms and
conditions of the permit and complete all restoration in a manner
satisfactory to the Board and in accordance with the permit;
significant public safety hazards exist which will not be addressed
by the Applicant;or material environmental damage has resulted
from the earth removal activity and remediation will not be
addressed by the Applicant in a manner satisfactory to the Board.
5.The Applicant shall submit a photographic survey of Cross Street
and Legacy Farms Road North (old Rafferty Road)in the vicinity of
the project prior to and upon completion of earthwork activity.
The photographic survey shall clearly show the conditions of the
roadways that are to be used during the project before and after
earthwork activity commences.The Applicant shall be responsible
for repairing any damage to the roadway caused by the project.
6.In the event that any of the permit conditions are not faithfully
observed and performed,the Board shall have the authority to
revoke the permit at any time,in accordance with the provisions of
the Earth Removal Bylaw.
21
7.Earth removal activities shall not commence until the Applicant
submits a Traffic Management Plan and a Street Opening Plan and
to the relevant Town authorities and provides the Planning Board
with evidence of approval of these plans.
8.Earth removal activities shall not commence until all required
permits and approvals have been obtained.
9.Noise and Dust mitigation strategies as outlined in the response
letter from Eversource Energy,dated August 20,2019,shall be
included in a construction management plan and submitted to the
Planning Board prior to the start of construction.
Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Permit
1.All erosion and sediment controls shall comply with the following
performance criteria:
●Minimize total area of disturbance and protect natural features
and soil.
●Sequence activities to minimize simultaneous areas of
disturbance.Mass clearings and grading of the entire site shall
be avoided.
●Minimize peak rate of runoff in accordance with the
Massachusetts Stormwater Standards.
●Minimize soil erosion and control sedimentation during
construction,provided that prevention of erosion is preferred
over sedimentation control.
●Divert uncontaminated water around disturbed areas.
●Maximize groundwater recharge.
●Install and maintain all Erosion and Sediment Control
measures in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications
and good engineering practices.
●Prevent off-site transport of sediment.
●Protect and manage on and off-site material storage areas
(overburden and stockpiles of dirt,borrow areas,or other
areas used solely by the permitted project are considered a
part of the project).
●Comply with applicable Federal,State and local laws and
regulations including waste disposal,sanitary sewer or septic
22
system regulations,and air quality requirements,including
dust control.
●Prevent significant alteration of habitats mapped by the
Massachusetts Natural Heritage &Endangered Species
Program as Endangered,Threatened or Of Special Concern,
Estimated Habitats of Rare Wildlife and Certified Vernal Pools,
and Priority Habitats of Rare Species from the proposed
activities.
●Institute interim and permanent stabilization measures,which
shall be instituted on a disturbed area as soon as practicable
but no more than 14 days after construction activity has
temporarily or permanently ceased on that portion of the site.
●Properly manage on-site construction and waste materials.
●Prevent off-site vehicle tracking of sediments.
●Dust shall be controlled at the site.
●Divert offsite runoff from highly erodible soils and steep slopes
to stable areas.
2.The project shall comply with the following Erosion and Sediment
Control requirements:
●Prior to any land disturbance activities commencing on the
site,the applicant shall physically mark limits of no land
disturbance on the site with tape,signs,or orange construction
fence,so that workers can see the areas to be protected.The
physical markers shall remain in place until a Certificate of
Completion has been issued.
●Appropriate erosion and sediment control measures shall be
installed prior to soil disturbance.Measures shall be taken to
control erosion within the project area.Sediment in runoff
water shall be trapped and retained within the project area.
Wetland areas and surface waters shall be protected from
sediment.
●Sediment shall be removed once the volume reaches ¼to ½
the height of a hay bale.Sediment shall be removed from silt
fence prior to reaching the load-bearing capacity of the silt
fence which may be lower than ¼ to ½ the height.
●Sediment from sediment traps or sedimentation ponds shall
be removed when design capacity has been reduced by 50
percent.
23
●Soil stockpiles must be stabilized or covered at the end of each
workday.Stockpile side slopes shall not be greater than 2:1.All
stockpiles shall be surrounded by sediment controls.
●Disturbed areas remaining idle for more than 14 days shall be
stabilized with seeding,wood chips,bark mulch,tarpaulins,or
any other approved methods.
●For active construction areas such as borrow or stockpile
areas,roadway improvements and areas within 50 feet of a
building under construction,a perimeter sediment control
system shall be installed and maintained to contain soil.
●A tracking pad or other approved stabilization method shall be
constructed at all entrance/exit points of the site to reduce the
amount of soil carried onto roadways and off the site.
●Permanent seeding shall be undertaken in the spring from
March through May,and in late summer and early fall from
August to October 15.During the peak summer months and in
the fall after October 15,when seeding is found to be
impractical,appropriate temporary stabilization shall be
applied.Permanent seeding may be undertaken during the
summer if plans provide for adequate mulching and watering.
●All slopes steeper than 3:1 (h:v,33.3%),as well as perimeter
dikes,sediment basins or traps,and embankments must,upon
completion,be immediately stabilized with sod,seed and
anchored straw mulch,or other approved stabilization
measures.Areas outside of the perimeter sediment control
system must not be disturbed.
●Temporary sediment trapping devices must not be removed
until permanent stabilization is established in all contributory
drainage areas.
●All temporary erosion and sediment control measures shall be
removed after final site stabilization.Disturbed soil areas
resulting from the removal of temporary measures shall be
permanently stabilized within 30 days of removal.
3.A minimum of seven days prior to the start of construction,a
detailed construction sequence shall be submitted to the Principal
Planner by the site contractor for review and approval.The
approved construction sequence shall be followed throughout the
course of the construction and shall be altered only with prior
review and written approval from the Principal Planner.
24
4.A copy of the signed Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be
provided to the Board prior to construction.
5.All required SWPPP Stormwater Construction Site Inspection
Reports shall be submitted to the Principal Planner within 14 days of
each inspection.
6.An adequate stockpile of erosion control materials shall be on site at
all times for emergency or routine replacement and shall include
materials to repair or replace silt fences,hay bales,stone filters,
berms or any other devices planned for use during construction.
7.The disturbed area shall be temporarily stabilized by hydroseeding if
construction of the replacement pipeline is not commenced within
30 days of lot clearing.
8.Construction shall not commence until all required permits and
approvals have been obtained.
9.The contractor and/or applicant shall provide restoration inspection
reports to the Planning Board until site is stabilized and notify the
Planning Board when the site is stabilized.
10.Eversource shall provide sufficient funding to the Town for a
consultant to work on behalf of the Town in performing site
inspections and monitoring compliance with the permit,as provided
for in Section 6.C.2 of the Hopkinton Stormwater Regulations.
8.0 Cross Street - Scenic Road Application - Eversource Energy
8.1.Background
This application is related to the LNG Pipeline proposal,as the easement for the
pipeline travels across Cross Street.The work proposed is to temporarily alter
approximately five (5)feet of existing rock wall within the road layout,which will
be rebuilt to the current condition after the completion of work.No trees are
proposed to be cut as part of this work.
8.2.Regulatory Review
The proposed work has been duly noticed as required in the Scenic Roads Bylaw.
Cross Street is designated as a scenic road for the entire length and the rock wall
to be temporarily altered is within the public road layout.
8.3.Relevant Materials for this Meeting
●Scenic Road Application, dated 7/11/19
●Application Narrative and Exhibits, dated July 2019
●Overall Site Plan, dated 6/14/19
●Email from John Westerling, DPW Director, dated 7/29/19
●Email from Rebekah Lacey, Town Counsel, dated 9/3/19
25
8.4.Comments Received
Town Counsel Comments:
1.The application does not clearly and specifically address the criteria set
forth in Section 160-6 of the Hopkinton Scenic Roads Bylaw.Each of these
criteria should be addressed individually.
2.The application states that only “saplings”are present within the
right-of-way,but it appears from the photos and plan that that statement
may not be accurate.The applicant should more specifically evaluate
whether any trees greater than 3 inches in diameter at breast height (per
§160-1 of the Bylaw)are present within the right-of-way within the Scenic
Road Layout.If any are,the applicant should state whether any of these
trees will be cut or removed.
3.Since the stone wall extends only 5 feet into the southern portion of the
right-of-way (according to the application form),it is not clear why
temporary removal of the wall is necessary,given that the new gas line
will be installed in the northern portion of the right-of-way.
4.The applicant should provide a copy of the archeological survey report
described on page 4 of the application narrative,as well as any responses
received from tribal representatives and the Massachusetts Historical
Commission.
DPW Director Comments:
None.
8.5.Decision Criteria
The Planning Board’s decision on any application for proposed work affecting
scenic roads shall be based on consideration of the following criteria (§160-6):
●The degree to which the proposed work would adversely affect the scenic
and aesthetic values upon which the scenic road designation was
originally based.
●The necessity for the proposed work in terms of public safety, welfare, or
convenience.
●Compensatory action proposed, such as replacement of trees or walls.
●Availability of reasonable alternatives to the proposed work which could
reduce or eliminate anticipated damage to trees or stone walls.
●Whether the proposed work would compromise or harm other
environmental or historical values.
●Consistency of the proposed work with previously adopted Town plans
and policies.
26
8.6.Public Hearing Outline
None.
8.7.Board Actions
The Board’s votes on the submitted materials will consist of:
●For the Scenic Road Application -Decision is due 21 days after the close
of the public hearing and a simple majority vote is required for approval.
All members are eligible to vote.
8.8.Other
None.
9.0 223 Pond Street - Scenic Road Application - Christine and Andre Navez
9.1.Background
The proposed work is to temporarily remove approximately 15 feet of existing
rock wall to accommodate installation of a septic system.The Applicant states
that the wall will be rebuilt in kind after the completion of the work.Trees are
proposed to be removed as part of this work,however,the trees are located on
private property and therefore not subject to the Scenic Road permit process.
9.2.Regulatory Review
The proposed work has been duly noticed as required in the Scenic Roads Bylaw.
Pond Street is designated as a scenic road for the entire length and the rock wall
to be temporarily altered is within the public road layout.
9.3.Relevant Materials for this Meeting
●Scenic Road Application, dated 8/5/19
●Email from John Westerling, DPW Director, dated 8/6/19
9.4.Comments Received
Principal Planner Comments:
The proposed work appears to conform to the requirements of the Scenic Roads
bylaw.The Applicant has proposed to temporarily alter the rock wall and rebuild
to the existing condition.
DPW Director Comments:
None.
9.5.Decision Criteria
The Planning Board’s decision on any application for proposed work affecting
scenic roads shall be based on consideration of the following criteria (§160-6):
●The degree to which the proposed work would adversely affect the scenic
and aesthetic values upon which the scenic road designation was
originally based.
27
●The necessity for the proposed work in terms of public safety, welfare, or
convenience.
●Compensatory action proposed, such as replacement of trees or walls.
●Availability of reasonable alternatives to the proposed work which could
reduce or eliminate anticipated damage to trees or stone walls.
●Whether the proposed work would compromise or harm other
environmental or historical values.
●Consistency of the proposed work with previously adopted Town plans
and policies.
9.6.Public Hearing Outline
None.
9.7.Board Actions
The Board’s votes on the submitted materials will consist of:
●For the Scenic Road Application -Decision is due 21 days after the close
of the public hearing and a simple majority vote is required for approval.
All members are eligible to vote.
9.8.Other
None.
10.0 57 Hayden Rowe -Major Site Plan Review -Chesmore Funeral Home and
Cremation Services, Inc.
10.1.Background
The Applicant is proposing the “addition of a chapel,replicated barn,and will
renovate bathroom facilities,prep room,and added garage space.”The purpose
of these additions and improvements is to facilitate the use of a larger chapel,
allow for safer queuing of people in larger services,upgrading of bathrooms,
and an employee parking area below the proposed reconstructed structure.
The Applicant states that the proposed work is not anticipated to increase the
demand for water or sewer services,no increase in traffic impacts,no increase in
employees.
The barn has already been demolished under an issued demolition permit.
10.2.Regulatory Review
The proposed addition is larger than 5,000 square feet,which includes the
basement area pursuant to Article XX,therefore classifying the proposed work
as a major project.
§210-136.1 Site Plan Standards
The site plan shall be designed to conform to the following Site Plan Standards:
28
A.Site disturbance in wetland buffer zones and to slopes in excess of 25%shall
be minimized.
B.Unique natural and historic features shall be preserved whenever feasible,
and the use of §210-117.2,Lots with Historic Structures,shall be considered
as a mechanism to do so, where appropriate.
C.Tree, vegetation and soil removal shall be minimized.
D.The site activities shown on the Site Plan shall be screened from view from
abutting properties in residential use.Methods of screening may include
solid fencing,landscaping or other proposals of the Applicant,subject to
review by the Planning Board.Such screening may be located on or off-site.If
located off-site,written permission of the off-site property owner shall be
provided to the Board.
E.All utilities shall be underground.
F.Exposed storage areas,machinery,service areas,truck loading areas,utility
buildings and structures and other similar uses shall be visually screened
from abutting properties and those using public ways.Screening methods
may consist of solid fencing,landscaping or similar proposals submitted by
the Applicant, subject to review by the Planning Board.
G.The site plan shall show measures to reduce and abate noise and odors
generated from the site that will impact surrounding properties.
H.The site plan shall comply with all zoning requirements.
I.The site plan shall maximize the convenience and safety of vehicular and
pedestrian movement within the site and to and from adjacent public ways.If
supporting documentation,such as a traffic or parking study,submitted to
the Planning Board indicates that the vehicular and pedestrian traffic
movement depicted on the site plan and proposed in the application will
have a significant negative impact or impacts on the site or within the
adjacent ways, such impacts shall be mitigated by the Applicant.
J.Parking areas shall be designed so that they are safe and convenient and do
not detract from the use and enjoyment of proposed structures.Parking
areas shall be designed to facilitate safe pedestrian access to the structures
and other on-site facilities.
K.The site plan shall minimize the number of curb cuts on public ways.
L.Driveways shall be designed to ensure safe sight distances at interior and
exterior intersections and along driveways,in accordance with applicable
AASHTO requirements.
M.Sidewalks shall be provided along the entire frontage of the subject property
along existing public ways.The Planning Board may approve alternative
provisions or waive the requirements of this Standard in situations where
sidewalk construction or use is not feasible or practical.
N.Levels of illumination shall be provided as follows:[Amended 5-6-2015 ATM.
Art. 36]
(1)No property may have exterior lighting that exceeds the average
illumination level recommended by the Illuminating Engineering
Society of North America for such use as set forth in “Lighting Facilities
for Parking Facilities,”Illuminating Engineering Society,2014 and “The
Lighting Handbook,” 10th Ed., Illuminating Engineering Society, 2011.
29
(2)For pole mounted lights in parking and driveway areas,the height of
the light source shall not exceed 15 feet,which shall be measured
from the ground at the base of the pole to the bottom of the fixture.
(3)Pedestrian area lighting shall utilize fully shielded fixtures,and the
height of light source shall not exceed 12 feet,measured from the
ground at the base of the pole to the bottom of the fixture.
(4)No exterior lighting may interfere with the safe movement of motor
vehicles on public ways or private ways open to the public.
(5)Mercury vapor lamps shall be prohibited.
(6)Uplighting shall be permitted only when used in one of the following
manners:
(a)To light a primary entrance,when the fixture or lamp is
wall-mounted under an architectural element (e.g.,roofs over
walkways,entries or overhanging,nontranslucent eaves)so
that the uplighting is fully captured;
(b)To light local, state or national flags; or
(c)To highlight or illuminate a building facade or landscaping,or
to highlight or illuminate statues or monuments.
(7)Floodlighting shall be permitted only if a fully shielded fixture is
utilized and no lighting will fall onto the property of others.
(8)Safety and security lighting shall use motion sensors,photocells,or
photocells or timers to control duration of nighttime illumination.
(9)Exterior lighting of recreation facilities shall utilize fully shielded
fixtures and,except as authorized by Special Permit or Site Plan
Approval,shall be turned off by 10:00 p.m.or at the conclusion of an
activity begun before 10:00 p.m.;provided,however,that in any event
the exterior lighting shall be turned off by midnight.
(10)Blinking,flashing,moving,revolving and flickering lights,as well as
lighting that changes intensity or color shall be prohibited except for
lighting for public safety or traffic control and lighting required by the
U.S.Federal Aviation Administration for air traffic control and warning
purposes.
(11)Notwithstanding any provisions of this subsection to the contrary,
sidewalks that run along the perimeter of a site and are in a public
right of way or on abutting property may be illuminated,and
illumination may spill onto abutting non-residential property if
requested in writing by the abutting property owner.
Exterior lighting that does not conform to the provisions of this
subsection may be allowed by special permit from the Planning Board
if the Planning Board finds that such exterior lighting will be
consistent with the Purposes of this Article,or that there are other
demonstrable community,health,safety or welfare benefits that will
be served by the exterior lighting.No special permit may be granted
pursuant to this subsection unless the Planning Board determines
that the proposed exterior lighting is appropriate for the size and use
of the property, any buildings thereon, and the neighborhood setting.
30
O.Adequate access shall be provided to each structure for emergency vehicles
and personnel.
P.The site plan shall conform to applicable Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection Stormwater Management Regulations.The site
plan shall show adequate measures to prevent pollution of surface water
and groundwater,to minimize erosion and sedimentation and to prevent
changes in the potential for flooding.Stormwater management facilities shall
be designed so that neighboring properties,public ways and public storm
drainage systems will not be adversely impacted.
Q.Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on the roof,grounds or
buildings shall be screened from view from the ground.
R.All dumpsters shall be screened from public view.
10.3.Relevant Materials for this Meeting
●Site Plan Application Package, dated 8/12/19
●Site Plans, dated 8/8/19, revised 8/13/19
○Too large to email, linked here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1f8Asx0h_M2P4l_lFYDWuX-EGwaNCI94
g/view?usp=sharing
●Architectural Plans, dated 5/14/19
○Too large to email, linked here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1odgJU3uHfrOPFtl_javMmwzrGNq-_TP
8/view?usp=sharing
●Stormwater Report, dated 8/8/19
●Construction Management Plan
●Planning Board Narrative document, dated 8/9/19
●Additional Narrative, dated 8/13/19
●Email from John Westerling, DPW, dated 8/13/19
●Email from Chief Slaman, FD, dated 8/20/19
●Board of Health comments, dated 9/4/19
●BETA Review Letter, dated 9/3/19
●Design Review Board Recommendation, dated 8/22/19
10.4.Comments Received
John Westerling, DPW:
None.
Chief Slaman, FD:
The observations that stand out are the front access,the reference to stacked
parking and our ability to travel through to Holt Street.The Engineer has
commented that all access requirements are met.Below are code references
and comments.
●Per 527 CMR 1 (2015 ed),Chapter 18.2.3.2.1:"A fire department access
road shall extend to within 50 ft of at least one exterior door that can be
opened from the outside and that provides access to the interior of the
building."
○Fire department access roads are defined as having an
unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet,unobstructed vertical
31
clearance of not less that 13 ft 6 in,and surfaces designed and
maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus on an
all weather driving surface.
●Comment related to code reference:
○Currently Hayden Rowe Street meets the qualifications of a fire
department access road per 527 CMR 1,but the distance to the
closest exterior door of 57 Hayden Rowe Street exceeds 50 feet.
●Additional Comments:
○A swept path analysis of the existing u-shaped driveway will assist
us in assessing if our vehicles will be able to exit Hayden Rowe
Street during an emergency for the safety of our responders,as
well as passing traffic.
○The proposed stacked parking solution would not allow
emergency apparatus access to either side or rear of the structure.
It would also eliminate our secondary means of access from Holt
Street.These factors will increase risk for all involved parties
during an emergency event.
Shaun McAuliffe, BOH:
●The funeral home and outbuilding is serviced with municipal water and
sewer service, as such, well or septic installation is not a concern.
●The construction and demolition work must be completed in accordance
with all applicable rules and regulations as promulgated by the
Commonwealth of MA (Asbestos, Lead, Dust and Pest Controls).
●Efforts should be taken to minimize nuisance conditions during the
development process.
●As stated in the Stormwater Report,any illicit discharges identified will be
terminated and the proposed site uses will not generate,store or
discharge any pollutants to the groundwater and/or wetland resource
areas.
Design Review Board:
●Lights to be installed on-site shall be those determined to be considerate
to adjacent properties.
10.5.Decision Criteria
The Planning Board shall issue a “Decision of Site Plan Review”in one of the
following forms:
A.A written approval of the application subject to any reasonable conditions,
modifications and restrictions relating to the Site Plan Standards contained in
Section 210-136.1; or
B.Disapproval of the application if the Applicant fails to furnish the information,
materials or fees required in this Article or by the Submission Requirements
and Procedures adopted by the Planning Board,or if the application and site
plan present a problem so intractable so as to admit of no reasonable
solution.
32
Notwithstanding the above,regulation of uses and structures referred to in
section 3 of Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws shall be limited to
the extent required by said section.
10.6.Public Hearing Outline
1.Project introduction and review - Applicant
2.Staff Report
3.Consultant Review
4.Planning Board members and Public – Add to Detailed Discussion items
5.Detailed Discussion, with Public Comment for each topic
5.1.1.Vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow; truck traffic flow;
emergency vehicle access
5.1.2.Intended uses
5.1.3.Stormwater management
5.1.4.Site lighting
5.1.5.Utilities; Water/Sewer use
5.1.6.Parking lot layout; dumpster location; snow storage/snow
removal
5.1.7.Noise; HVAC/exhaust systems; Screening of HVAC (if
applicable)
5.1.8.Crosswalk location; Sidewalks
5.1.9.Building design and landscaping
5.1.10.Historic Structures (if applicable)
5.1.11.Signage
5.1.12.Solar Panels/alternative energy
5.1.13.Affordable Housing Units (if applicable)
5.1.14.Impacts on: 1) schools; 2) other municipal services; 3) value of
neighboring residential properties
5.1.15.Town Department and Board/Committee Comments not
covered above
6.Additional or New Comments and Information
7.Standards/Findings
7.1.1.Discuss Site Plan standards and plan revisions to be made (if
applicable)
7.1.2.Discuss Special Permit findings (if applicable)
7.1.3.Discuss findings and standards for other approvals (if
applicable)
8.Discuss/Vote on waivers (if applicable)
9.Discuss conditions of approval
10.Final public comment
11.Vote to close public hearing
12.Vote on Permits being requested
33
10.7.Board Actions
The Board’s votes on the submitted materials will consist of:
●For Site Plan Review -Decision is due 90 days after the close of the public
hearing and a simple majority vote is required for approval,disapproval,
or approval with conditions. All members are eligible to vote.
10.8.Other
None.
11.0 Zoning Board of Appeals Notices
●25 Grove Street
●51 Saddle Hill Road
●26 West Elm Street
12.0 Next Meetings
●September 23rd
○Bucklin/Leonard Street
○Wood Street Solar
○Legacy Farms Restricted Land Minor Amendment
○Cedar Street Presentation from Bruce Issadore
●October 7th
●October 28th
34
Hopkinton MA1165: Jane Moran
Application created: 08/15/2019
Contacts
Email jmoran2045@aol.com
Cell*(508) 326-7584
Business (508) 435-3807
Home (508) 435-3807
Address 70 East Main St, 70 East Main St
Hopkinton MA, 01748
Application details
Occupation details
Occupation retired law enforcemnet
Availability details now
Education and Experience After 35 years of Law Enforcement I am still employed as
a part time officer. I also serve as Chair of the Upper Charles Trail Committee. Over the
years I have been an active observer of the Planning Board, first as a Legacy Farms
involved observer/neighbor. The UCTC has vast interest in future trail planning and the
potential ability for developers to participate in a conversation. I've noticed over the years
that often the "trails" interest gets lost in some of the discussions. I feel I could bring some
additional information to the conversation.
Attachments
Appointment details
1 Planning Board For: 0 Against: 0 Final Recommendation: None
Qualifications
Workflow
Name Description Status Date
Clerks Schedule IN PROGRESS
Clerks Appoint PENDING
Hopkinton MA1169: Mary Elena Arnaut
Application created: 08/25/2019
Contacts
Email marnaut51@gmail.com
Home (508) 435-9772
Address 51 Teresa Road
Hopkinton MA, 01748
Application details
Occupation details
Occupation Retired
Availability details Immediately
Education and Experience I am a retired IBM professional and a volunteer in
Hopkinton (please see my attached resume). I have attended several Planning Board
meetings and have an understanding of its function and requirements. I am respectful of all
policy and procedures governing the organizations I serve. I have no "conflicts of interest"
nor any full-time professional or personal obiligation which would inhibit me to serve as a
Planning Board member. If appointed to the vacancy which expires May 2020, I believe my
professional experiences and my volunteer credentials would serve the Board well. Thank
you for considering my application. Sincerely, Mary
Attachments
Arnaut_Resume_2019
Appointment details
1 Planning Board For: 0 Against: 0 Final Recommendation: None
Qualifications
Workflow
Name Description Status Date
Clerks Schedule IN PROGRESS
Clerks Appoint PENDING
Hopkinton MA1171: Mike McNamara
Application created: 08/26/2019
Contacts
Email mike.mcnamara12@gmail.com
Address 7 Baker Lane
Hopkinton MA, 01748-3110
Application details
Occupation details
Education and Experience My name is Mike McNamara and I’m running for the
Planning Board, 1-year term. My family and I have been residents of Hopkinton for 22
years, our kids have gone through the school system, and I care what happens in town.
I enjoyed my time as a Library Trustee, but after 9 years I wanted to do something
different. I have been volunteering in town every year in different capacities since 2001. I
have always been interested in running for the Planning Board and want to help with the
different issues facing the town. The town continues to grow and there is a lot of building
and development in process or planned and I can provide a fresh perspective and new
ideas.
Additional volunteer/service experience includes: Coach for Hopkinton Boys and Girls Youth
Soccer, Coach for Hopkinton Youth Baseball and Softball, Coach Hopkinton Boys and Girls
Youth Basketball, St. John the Evangelist of Hopkinton Parish Council, Religious Education
Teacher St. John the Evangelist of Hopkinton, Worcester Mustard Seed Volunteer, Worcester
County Food Bank Volunteer.
Thanks.
Attachments
Appointment details
1 Planning Board For: 0 Against: 0 Final Recommendation: None
Qualifications
Workflow
Name Description Status Date
Clerks Schedule IN PROGRESS
Clerks Appoint PENDING
Hopkinton MA1173: Smriti Choudhury
Application created: 09/05/2019
Contacts
Email smriti_chou@yahoo.com
Cell*(508) 361-8858
Business (617) 526-6024
Address 12 Locust Lane
Hopkinton MA, 01748
Application details
Occupation details
Occupation Attorney
Company name WilmerHale
Position Associate
Education and Experience Dear Sir/Madam:
I recently moved to Hopkinton from Ashland and would like to continue serving my
community by joining a municipal board. I am a commercial real estate attorney in Boston
by profession and have served on the Ashland Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) since 2016
and resigned in August 2019 due to my move to Hopkinton. I am a New England girl,
through and through- going to Tufts University for undergrad and Northeastern Law School
for law. I absolutely loved serving on the Ashland ZBA and would like to continue my town
service at my new home of Hopkinton either on the Planning Board or Board of Appeals. I
would prefer to serve on the Planning Board for a different perspective as I have served on
the ZBA for over 3 years and would like to be involved in the zoning amendment process
and subdivision/ANR applications. As a commercial real estate attorney and private citizen,
I am uniquely positioned to understand the business perspectives of a developer but also
the views of the local community in preserving the character of the town. I look forward to
hearing from you and hope to be given the opportunity to serve this great town of
Hopkinton. Please contact me (email preferred) if I can provide any further information for
review, such as my resume. Thank you in advance for your consideration of my candidacy.
Sincerely,
Smriti
Attachments
Appointment details
1 Board of Appeals (ZBA)For: 0 Against: 0 Final Recommendation: None
2 Planning Board For: 0 Against: 0 Final Recommendation: None
Qualifications
Workflow
Name Description Status Date
Clerks Schedule IN PROGRESS
Clerks Appoint PENDING
Hopkinton MA1167: Sundar Sivaraman
Application created: 08/19/2019
Contacts
Email sundar@post.harvard.edu
Address 20 Carriage Hill Rd
Hopkinton MA, 01748
Application details
Occupation details
Availability details Immediate
Education and Experience Education
Masters Degree in Management Studies - Harvard Univ (Extension School)
Masters Degree in Computer Science - IMT Ghaziabad, India
Bachelors Degree in Accounting - Delhi University, India
Work experience
Director - Digital Analytics - CVS Health - CURRENT
Product Management - CVS Health - Sep 2014 to Dec 2018
Attachments
Appointment details
1 ZAC For: 0 Against: 0 Final Recommendation: None
Qualifications
Workflow
Name Description Status Date
Clerks Schedule IN PROGRESS
Clerks Appoint PENDING
To be distributed to the Planning Board and added to the public record regarding the early acceptance of Legacy Farms
Road North by the Town of Hopkinton.
August 20, 2019
Dear Board Members,
I am writing to comment on the discussions the Planning Board has been conducting regarding the early acceptance of
Legacy Farms Road North (LFRN) so that school bus service can be provided at multiple points along LFRN rather than at
the intersection LFRN and Frankland Rd. I commend the Planning Board for its leadership on public safety, for taking the
time to visit the site to observe the situation first hand, and for bringing all parties into the discussion.
My comment has to do with a potential liability the Town of Hopkinton may be assuming in accepting LFRN. As has been
established as far back as 2006 (Ransom Consulting, Results of an evaluation of the distribution of organochlorine
pesticides at growing Field 29 A & D of the former Weston Nurseries property, November 16, 2017), the pesticide
dieldrin was found to exist in the soil in excess of reportable levels at the site but qualified for an exemption for cleanup
and remediation under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP, 310 CMR 40.0000) so long as no soils were
transported offsite. The significance of soil being transported offsite is that it may result in the developer being
responsible for creating a release or disposal site subject to the MCP for cleanup assessment and remediation.
Before the Town of Hopkinton accepts LFRN, it should assess the likelihood that dieldrin contaminated soil was
transported from the LFRN site to offsite locations during the construction of LFRN and determine what additional
liability, if any, it will be assuming by accepting the road.
For reference, a 2018 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) investigation of a recent
complaint (CE-18-0000088) of the transport of soil offsite by one of the Legacy Farms developers to several in-town
locations is publicly available. Among the actions that were ordered and/or taken as a result of this investigation were
the notification of the recipients of the transported soil, comprehensive testing of the transported soil, and the removal
of soil from recipient sites.
Letters were also sent to the other Legacy Farms developers reiterating their responsibilities with regard to the offsite
transport to include providing MassDEP with a list of all properties (and owners) where potentially impacted soils have
been distributed. Prior to recommending the acceptance of LFRN, I ask that the Planning Board conduct a public
discussion with the developer of LFRN as to the distribution of the excess soil from the construction of LFRN to include a
list of all properties (and owners) where soil was distributed.
Sincerely Yours,
Kathleen Towner
9 Kruger Road
GROWTH STUDY COMMITTEE VACANCIES
The Planning Board is seeking residents interested in serving on the Growth Study Committee for
two (2)at-large positions.The mission statement of the Growth Study Committee and the
anticipated deliverables are detailed below:
Mission Statement
Hopkinton is endowed with open space,natural resources,facilities and programs that promote a
well-educated and healthy community.The mission of this project,utilizing public input,analytics,
and objective experts,is to examine growth trends and development within the Town of Hopkinton
and identify and recommend actions to ensure Hopkinton can continue to support its citizens
throughout their lives to the highest of standards in education,public safety,health,and protection
of natural resources.
Specifically, the project aims to:
●Proactively manage growth;
●Enable better planning for town services;
●Identify parcels or zones that may have a significant impact on future growth patterns within
the Town create plans to ensure continued use that is in the best interest of Hopkinton; and
●Decrease likelihood of un-friendly 40B developments.
Deliverables shall include:
●Summary of public input collected throughout the project;
●Financial impact assessment of growth (residential and commercial)over the past 10 years
(by zoned area);
●Forecast model of growth and financial impact (forward looking)by zoned area over the next
10 years;
●Identification and prioritization of current parcels and/or zones with highest potential for
growth/change.Recommend optimal land uses/practices for each and contingency plans if
alternative uses are proposed; and
●Create POA (Plan of Action)that incorporates major stakeholders (other boards,town
leadership, etc.) and includes cadence and deliverables for ongoing growth monitoring.
The Planning Board is looking forward to appointing an energized and diverse field of applicants
that may be new to government or new to Hopkinton and also those with deep ties to the
community, as well as those representing varied parts of Town and different demographic
constituency groups. Interviews will be conducted at the August 12, 2019 Planning Board meeting and
applicants are highly encouraged to attend.
Those interested in applying should send a letter of interest to John Gelcich, Principal Planner
(jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov), 18 Main Street, Hopkinton, MA 01748 by 5:00 PM on Tuesday,
August 6, 2019. Email is preferred. This letter should contain a statement that is 250 words
or less and includes the following:
●Why you are interested in serving on this committee;
●How you are uniquely qualified to serve in this position; and
●What you look to achieve as a member of this committee.
Letters of interest should note the position for which it is being submitted. For more
information, please call John Gelcich at (508) 497 - 9745.
HOPKINTON PLANNING BOARD
Town Hall, 18 Main St., Hopkinton, MA
Monday, July 22, 2019 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES - (Draft, Not Finished)
MEMBERS PRESENT: Muriel Kramer, Chair, Gary Trendel, Vice Chair, David Paul, Amy
Ritterbusch, Patrick Atwell, Frank D'Urso, Mary Larson-Marlowe, Robert Benson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Deb Fein-Brug
Present: John Gelcich, Principal Planner, Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant
___________________________________________________________________________
Mr. Trendel opened the meeting at 7:00 P.M. and noted the Board will take care of some
administrative and other business while waiting for the Chair to arrive.
●Administrative Business - Minutes
The Board reviewed the draft Minutes of June 24, 2019. Mr. Atwell moved to approve the
Minutes as written, and Ms. Ritterbusch seconded the motion. Mr. Gelcich noted the Minutes
have been revised since they were distributed to the Board for review to include the documents
used at the meeting. Mr. D’Urso moved to amend the motion to approve the Minutes including
documents. Mr. Atwell seconded the motion, and the motion to amend passed unanimously.
The Board voted unanimously in favor of the amended motion.
●Appointments - Design Review Board
Ms. Ritterbusch stated there are 7 applicants for 7 positions. She noted the current members
have all asked to be reappointed, and there is now an applicant for the 7th position which has
been vacant for a year. Mr. Gelcich stated the Board consists of 5 full members and 2 alternates,
and it was decided to make the appointments as a group.
Ms. Kramer arrived at this time, and Mr. Trendel filled her in on the discussions held so far.
After further discussion, Ms. Kramer moved to appoint Jeanette Thomson, Jeff Doherty, Amy
Ritterbusch, Ria McNamara, and Sue-Ellen Stoddard to the Design Review Board as full
members, with Deb Fein-Brug and Joe Regan to serve as alternates for a term to expire on July
31, 2019. Mr. Paul seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor.
Ms. Kramer took over from Mr. Trendel to run the meeting at this time.
●Legacy Farms North School Bus Issue
Ms. Kramer noted Legacy Farms North was designed and built through collaboration between
the developer, the Town and the state to serve as a bypass road between Routes 135 and 85. She
noted the road was opened a couple of years ago with an official ribbon cutting ceremony with
state and local officials in attendance and is now beginning to be used consistently. She noted
traditionally roads are not accepted until all construction is done and in this case there is still a lot
going on. It was noted the DPW Director has not yet weighed in on this issue, and Ms. Kramer
stated they have to make sure to get his input. She stated the school bus company is not willing
to send buses up there creating a problem with children from the neighborhoods having to get the
bus at the corner of Legacy Farms North and Frankland Rd. She stated she witnessed the
situation in person just before the end of the school year and there is a safety issue because fast
moving traffic on Legacy Farms North does not (have to) stop while the children are waiting for
and getting on the bus. She noted the residents are looking for a solution, and it has been
suggested to accept the road even though it is not finished. She noted she was a little late tonight
because of a conference call with the chairs of the Select Board and School Committee, and
although they have different thoughts and probably won’t be able to address the issue before the
start of the school year, everyone is willing to work together towards a solution to this somewhat
unique situation.
John Coutinho, member, Select Board, stated they have to consider short, mid and long term
solutions, and the easiest one would be to accept the road as is, leaving the bond in place with
lots of conditions. He noted Legacy Farms North has been used as a Town road even since
before the ribbon cutting and is doing its job, taking off at least 15% of the traffic to
Southborough. He stated the School administration looked into getting a separate bus but the
only quote they received was for $300,000/year although that would be for a “luxury” bus and
hopefully they misunderstood. Mr. Coutinho stated the developer then suggested a bus to take
the children to Frankland Rd. for the time being. He stated in the meantime it was decided to
have a police officer there for at least one of the pickups, and during those times they typically
had to pull a few people over for speeding. He stated the best solution would be for the Select
Board and Planning Board to find a way to accept the road at a special town meeting. Mr.
Trendel stated there are costs associated with special town meetings, and it was noted it is not
overly expensive but it is a huge undertaking. Mr. Trendel noted a separate bus would be
expensive, but perhaps van rentals would be an option, and he would like to suggest carpooling
as a temporary solution.
Mr. D’Urso stated he likes Mr. Trendel’s suggestion to involve the residents through carpooling
as a short/mid term solution. He noted accepting the road via a special town meeting would be
the quickest but there is a risk with that in the long term. He suggested installing some type of
sturdy shelter for protection from traffic and the elements. It was noted the developer at this
point is responsible for snow removal on Legacy Farms North. Mr. Coutinho noted the
developer has been very cooperative, but it’s the Town’s responsibility to get the kids to the
schools safely although at this point they just have to pick them up at Frankland Rd. Ms. Kramer
stated carpooling to Frankland Rd. is not a solution at all due to safety issues, and from her
perspective it would have to be carpooling directly to the schools.
Ms. Ritterbusch noted it seems scheduling special town meetings has been difficult in the past
and she asked if this has even been discussed yet. She noted personally before voting in favor of
street acceptance, she would like to see documentation showing why all these other solutions
won’t work. She stated additional insurance to address liability issues appeals to her and may be
fairly inexpensive so she wants to see cost details. Ms. Kramer noted she was surprised to see a
real quick “no” to that idea. The Board discussed other possible solutions including moving the
Frankland Rd. stop away from the corner or building a short sidewalk.
●Continued Public Hearings -76 Main St. - 1) Site Plan Review, 2) Flexible Community
Special Permit - REC Hopkinton LLC
Ms. Larson-Marlowe moved to continue the public hearings at the request of the applicant to
September 9, 2019, Mr. D’Urso seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor.
●Legacy Farms North School Bus Issue - Continued Discussion
Mr. Paul asked if the Town would plow the sidewalks after the road is accepted, and it was noted
it depends on the distance from the schools. He suggested following up on that issue, and Ms.
Kramer stated they can certainly ask that question. It was noted that the kids would be picked up
on Legacy Farms North at the end of each individual neighborhood and the side streets will be
maintained by the developer until the homeowners association takes over. Mr. Trendel noted the
big issue at Frankland Rd./Legacy Farms North is cars parked all over the place. It was noted the
sidewalk is not necessarily plowed in time for the morning pickup but perhaps they can have the
developer do it before 4 A.M. for instance. Mr. Paul asked what is left to do, and it was noted
they still have to install street trees and the grass strip between the road and the sidewalk.
Ms. Larson-Marlowe summarized the issues at Frankland Rd./Legacy Farms North as reported
by the residents and observed by Town officials. She noted a bus shelter is a good idea but
probably not big enough based on the number of children, and the residents reportedly already
carpool as much as possible. It was noted Legacy Farms has 118 children in the school system
as of April 2019 with 41 at the Marathon elementary school which is the age group of the most
concern. The Board discussed the possibility of the bus pulling into the right of way of Legacy
Farms North in order to be able to stop traffic in both directions, and it was noted that may not be
safe enough and the bus company may not be amenable. Mr. Coutinho stated they are trying to
get a police officer to stop traffic, but with 3 stops in the morning and 3 in the afternoon that
would be an expensive solution. Ms. Larson-Marlowe noted carpooling the children to school
may be a short term solution but it does not seem right to basically require it. Ms. Kramer
agreed, and Mr. Atwell noted requiring carpooling would be absurd putting an extra burden on
parents and creating liability issues for them. Mr. Atwell suggested working with the developer
on the possibility of a private bus as a short term solution, and find out about the cost of
additional liability insurance for expanding the bus route on an unaccepted road. Ms. Kramer
stated extra insurance was discussed during the elections but apparently the bus company is not
interested in that idea. Mr. Coutinho stated he actually was surprised by the idea but it would
have been a good interim solution. Mr. Atwell stated he is in favor of accepting the road as is
with conditions if there is precedent. Mr. Coutinho noted the Town within the last 3 years has
been accepting “forgotten” streets, which for years had full benefits without realizing they were
never accepted as public ways.
Ms. Kramer stated no one Board/Committee has yet taken ownership of the issue, and the
residents find themselves going from place to place to get answers and unfortunately no one
solution has come to the top. She stated if they are going to consider street acceptance, they
should first talk to the DPW and the Town’s professional staff but in the meantime no practical
short term solution should be ignored. Mr. Trendel asked about the next step, and Mr. Coutinho
stated he feels the Planning Board should then take it from there. Ms. Kramer stated the
Planning Board was instrumental in the Legacy Farms planning process and the road was
intentionally built to bypass downtown but they did not anticipate the school bus issue. Mr.
Trendel asked that the Select Board and School Committee be kept up to date as part of the
process. The Board scheduled this issue on the agenda for August 12 and asked Mr. Gelcich to
invite the DPW Director.
Mr. Paul asked if it is possible to keep the bond if the road is accepted, and Mr. Coutinho stated
yes, and the developer already agreed. Ms. Ritterbusch stated this issue was brought to the
attention of the Select Board during one of the public comment sessions and she feels the
Planning Board should ask them to officially put it on one of their agendas, and Ms. Kramer
stated she will make a formal request. Ms. Ritterbusch suggested using a crossing guard as a
short term, relatively inexpensive solution.
Mr. D'Urso stated the school bus route software changes every year based on grade by grade
enrollment numbers and they should not be caught off guard in the long term if things change.
Mr. Benson arrived at this time.
Mr. D’Urso noted moving the bus stop from Frankland Rd. to Legacy Farms North may at least
offer more places for the parents to park, and Ms. Kramer stated she was not able to find a good
place anywhere in that area. Mr. Paul noted he feels short term solutions are the domain of the
School Committee and Select Board, and the Planning Board should focus on getting the road
accepted as soon as possible. Ms. Larson-Marlowe stated she would like to know how long it
would take for this process to take its course, and the School Dept. should be in the loop so that
any bus route changes can be effective as soon as possible if special town meeting accepts the
road. She noted the developer apparently is willing to cooperate and hopefully the Select Board
can focus on short/mid term solutions. Mr. Atwell stated they should get everyone involved and
accept the road as soon as possible. Ms. Kramer stated she is in favor of exploring the possibility
of road acceptance but they should be open to feedback from the professional staff as to the best
plan going forward. She thanked Mr. Coutinho for discussing this with the Board.
●Appointments - Trail Coordination and Management Committee
Mr. Gelcich stated Mr. Paul has volunteered for this position, but the Board did not yet officially
vote on it. He clarified that in this case the Board makes recommendations to the Select Board
and does not make the actual appointment. Ms. Larson-Marlowe moved to recommend Mr. Paul
to be appointed by the Select Board, Ms. Ritterbusch seconded the motion, and the Board voted
7 in favor, 1 abstention (Paul).
●Update - I-90/I-495 Interchange Improvements
Mr. Paul noted Mr. Trendel, Ms. Kramer and he attended a recent state presentation on the
proposed improvements. He noted the state has now decided on the final plan, and it is good
news for the neighbors because instead of 50 ft. flyovers they are now proposing them to be only
35 ft. high. It was noted the next public information session has been scheduled for July 25,
2019 at 6:30 P.M. at the Town Hall. Mr. Paul provided a quick update on the design. Mr.
Gelcich stated as indicated at a previous presentation the state is required by federal law to do
sound mitigation studies for the adjacent neighborhood and that will be done during the
environmental review period.
Mr. Trendel stated he feels the state has done a pretty comprehensive job of assessing the various
aspects of the project, and safety is their top priority. Mr. Paul noted he brought up the
possibility of commuter ramps at the Rt. 135/Mass Pike interchange but that is not option so that
topic can be taken off the Planning Board agenda. Mr. D’Urso asked about the Fruit St. bridge,
and it was noted it will have to be replaced to accommodate widening of Rt. 495 in that location,
and because of other area projects Fruit St. will be an open issue in terms of traffic management
for a long time. It was noted the Fire Chief at the presentation brought up the possibility of an
emergency access off Rt. 495 onto Fruit St. to take traffic off Saddle Hill Rd. and that was
dismissed because of the steep grade while Wood St. as an alternative did not appear to offer a
lot of advantages. Mr. Gelcich stated they also brought up the extension of the Eversource
pipeline into Westborough which will be done about the same time affecting the rotary. Mr.
Benson stated he lives on that side of Town, and if the Westborough rotary and Fruit St. are both
interrupted, then Saddle Hill Rd. will end up with much more traffic that it can handle. Ms.
Kramer stated that is a concern, and as a Board and as Town residents they can always provide
feedback. She asked if the state is talking to Eversource, and Mr. Gelcich stated yes. Mr. Paul
stated he asked them about a traffic study on Fruit St., and was told they have not gotten to it yet.
It was noted that work on the Downtown Corridor will begin in May 2020, repairs to the Fruit St.
railroad bridge will start soon, and work on the I-90/I-495 interchange is scheduled from 2022 to
2027 but will be done in phases to some extent.
●Consultant Peer Review Contract - Invitation for Bids (IFB)
Mr. Gelcich stated he provided a draft IFB to get the Board’s input on the scope. He noted the
content is not confidential per se, but they want to make sure it does not look like one company
gets a first shot at the contract. The Board had no changes to the wording and the bidding
process will go forward as scheduled.
●71 Frankland Rd. - Seaboard Solar - Informal Discussion
Mr. Gelcich stated this concerns redevelopment of 71 Frankland Rd., the former location of
Liberty Mutual. Pedro Rodrigues, Seaboard Solar, proponent, appeared before the Board. Mr.
Rodrigues noted Seaboard Solar is a real estate/commercial solar company and they have worked
in Massachusetts for almost 10 years. He noted they are in the process of buying the former
Liberty Mutual site originally presented mainly for real estate purposes, and will be buying the
entire property along with 2 other parcels in Hopkinton and a small parcel in Ashland. He noted
they are considering installing a commercial solar facility on the 50-acre parcel next to the
building but the plan before the Board tonight is just looking at maximizing the entire property
without taking the bylaws into consideration, and it is not what they really have in mind. Mr.
Rodrigues stated the property is split between the Agricultural and Professional Office zoning
districts, and the eventual proposal will be based on the Agricultural zoning requirement as it is
the more restrictive of the two. In response to a question of Mr. D’Urso, Mr. Rodrigues noted
the building is staying, but adding solar panels to the roof is not feasible. Mr. Rodrigues stated
they are currently talking to brokers about prospective tenants for the building. Mr. Trendel
asked how much land will be cleared for the solar facility, and Mr. Rodrigues stated the plan
before the Board shows 30 acres out of 50, but in reality they plan to clear about 20 acres. Ms.
Kramer asked why Seaboard Solar is presenting a plan that does not follow the regulations, and
Mr. Rodrigues stated that is the typical first step. Mr. Paul reminded Mr. Rodrigues that all
utilities are required to be underground.
●Future Agenda Items
Ms. Larson-Marlowe stated she wants to put the Zoning Advisory Committee (ZAC)
appointments on the next agenda. Mr. Gelcich asked about the need to advertise and it was
noted that is historically part of the process. Ms. Larson-Marlowe stated many of the current
members are liaisons from other groups, and it was noted the at-large members all have 2- or
3-year terms except for Ria McNamara and John Coutinho who are serving a 1-year term which
expires on August 31. Mr. Gelcich listed the members up for reappointment this year: Ted
Barker-Hook (representative of the Conservation Commission), Mary Larson-Marlowe
(Planning Board), Peggy Shaw (Board of Appeals), Ron Foisy (Chamber of Commerce), and
Ria McNamara and John Coutinho as the 1-year at-large members, and the Planning Board only
has to reappoint the 2 at-large positions which will then become 2-year appointments. Ms.
Kramer stated the Planning Board will reappoint Ms. Larson-Marlowe as its representative as a
matter of process. Ms. Larson-Marlowe noted the Committee has been reminded that some of
the positions are up for reappointment.
Mr. Paul stated he would like to talk about sidewalks at one of the next meetings.
The Board reviewed the draft agenda for August 12 and it was noted it will be the only meeting
that month.
Mr. Gelcich provided an update on the Whisper Way Amended Special Permit and Definitive
Subdivision applications currently before the Board. He noted there was an informal meeting
with the developer and his engineer to discuss the status of the project, and based on voting
requirements and eligible voting members, he is considering withdrawing and submitting the
exact same applications for a public hearing on August 12, and this is allowed according to
Town Counsel’s office. He stated the deadline for the new submission is tomorrow, and it will
be more of an administrative procedure where the applicant does not necessarily have to present
everything all over again and a recap would be sufficient so that all members are up to date and
can participate. Ms. Kramer stated she believes there will be changes to the plan to comply with
the lot frontage depth requirements, and Mr. Gelcich noted it would be a minor amendment.
Mr. Gelcich stated he identified an issue with the 0 Wood St. (Borrego Solar) application. He
noted the plans show the equipment in a separate parcel close to Wood St., which is also in the
Woodville Historic District, but the legal notice did not include this parcel and the applicant only
provided the names of the abutters to the larger parcel with the arrays. He noted he has
requested a revised abutters list and the application will be re-advertised with the correct
properties as if the previous hearing did not happen.
The Board discussed the minor site plan review application for 97 South St. also scheduled for
the next meeting. Ms. Kramer noted the process will be somewhat interesting because it also
requires Design Review Board review and their next meeting is not until August 20. Mr. Gelcich
noted they talked about this at the last Design Review Board meeting and it was suggested that
the members individually review the plans and submit comments to the Planning Board. Mr.
Gelcich stated it concerns a new business moving into the former Lonza site and the new tenant
wants to make changes to the facade, make 2 separate entrances and redo the parking lot with
new landscaping and lighting. Ms. Kramer stated the changes seem minor, and she would not
necessarily object to doing it this way but only if there are no issues that should be reviewed by
the full Design Review Board in the opinion of the individual members, but it also seems as if
they are bypassing the typical process. Board members generally were ok with the idea, and Ms.
Ritterbusch noted she just wants to make sure this will be the exception to the rule. Mr. Gelcich
stated there should be no back and forth between the Design Review Board and the applicant.
●Continued Public Hearings - Maspenock Woods - Unit #31/5 West Elm St. (Amended
Site Plan//Special Permit Applications) & Units 21, 22, 23, 24 (Amended Site Plan and
Building Changes) - Maspenock Woods Realty Trust
Mr. D’Urso moved to open the public hearings, Mr. Atwell seconded the motion, and the Board
voted unanimously in favor. Bruce Wheeler, Maspenock Woods Realty Trust, applicant, and
Peter Barbieri, Fletcher Tilton, attorney, appeared before the Board. Mr. Barbieri noted since
the last meeting and a site walk which was attended by a couple of Planning Board members,
they have addressed a number of landscape and erosion issues, and he distributed copies of a
landscape plan in connection with the changes to units 21-24. It was noted the plan was
submitted after the deadline for Planning Board meetings. Mr. Barbieri stated the landscaping
will be installed and finished by September, and the plan will provide 60 ft. of landscaping in
between structures. Mr. Paul asked if they will use deer-resistant arborvitae, and Mr. Wheeler
noted he will look into it. Mr. D’Urso noted he went out on his own and although it appears the
revised layout will fit on paper he is still concerned about overcrowding in this section of the
development. He noted the landscape plan shows more trees than he thought there would be, so
hopefully that will help unit-to-unit screening.
Mr. Gelcich asked if the Board wants to follow up on comments received from Maspenock
Woods residents at the previous meeting, and Ms. Kramer noted she feels those issues are not
necessarily under the Planning Board’s purview, but she appreciates the developer’s efforts to
address them. Mr. Gelcich stated this will then be considered an issue for the Building Dept.,
and after that it is a private matter.
Mr. Atwell noted he attended the site walk and feels the proposed landscaping will address some
of the concerns of the neighbors, and he has no other comments. Ms. Larson-Marlowe stated she
drove through the development and walked around on her own, and based on her observations
and the proposed screening plan she is ok with the revisions to units 21-24 although it seems to
be rather tight. She noted with respect to the proposed changes to unit 31 (5 West Elm St.) she is
concerned about the location and the fact that as part of the special permit a waiver was granted
to allow preservation of the existing house, even though personally, based on its condition she
has no objection to replacing it. Mr. Paul stated he has no comments, and Mr. D’Urso stated he
would like to get more information, Ms. Ritterbusch stated she does not think she has anything
to add, and it was determined the house is less than 75 years old. In response to a question of Mr.
Benson, it was clarified that the proposed square footage of units 21-24 will be with the average
range for the development. In response to a question of Mr. Benson, the applicant stated the
proposed square footage of units 21-24 will be within the average range for the development.
Mr. Benson asked if there is any new information from the Conservation Commission and the
Board of Health, and Mr. Barbieri stated that would only apply to unit 31 (5 West Elm St.). Mr.
Barbieri stated they received comments from the Board of Health with respect to the existing
septic system and they are meeting with the Conservation Commission tomorrow. Mr. Benson
stated he understands the parcel at 5 West Elm St. was originally considered for an access road
which was then moved around the corner. He noted he understands the structure is in very poor
condition, but he is leery of making changes to the original decision. He asked about the
possibility of demolishing the structure and start over in the same footprint, and Mr. Barbieri
stated that could be done in theory but it would not make financial sense and it still would not
look the same. He noted they are trying to work with the Conservation Commission to come up
with a more natural look and provide additional protection of existing resources. The applicant
noted they are proposing to replace the existing house with + 2,452 sf detached version of an
Emily unit with some architectural changes as recommended by the Design Review Board and
the driveway shifted to the other side. In response to a question of Mr. Trendel, Mr. Barbieri
noted the unit has its own septic system, does not share the roadway and is separated from the
rest of the development by wetlands and woods. Mr. Barbieri stated it meets the minimum
setbacks for the underlying Residence B (RB) district and could technically stand on its own as a
single family house but it is part of the special permit granted in 2006 and splitting it off would
require a number of additional steps including an amendment to the special permit and approval
from the condominium people. Mr. D’Urso stated there is a connecting walking path, and Mr.
Barbieri stated he is not sure if that alone justifies paying the full condominium fees.
Ms. Kramer stated she is struggling with this proposal, considering that the original decision
allowed for a waiver to keep the house, and she is somewhat reluctant to rethink a previous
Planning Board decision. She noted she is also reluctant to add to the waiver making the setback
even less compliant, and as far as aesthetics are concerned she is not sure she likes a
condominium unit there, which may have been the reason for the original Planning Board
decision. Ms. Ritterbusch stated she is inclined to grant the waiver as it complies with
underlying zoning and the existing structure is an eyesore and not historically significant. Mr.
Benson noted he is not in favor of decreasing setbacks in an area so close to Lake Maspenock.
Mr. Barbieri offered to provide a landscape plan to show there won’t be any impact on abutting
property.
Phil Paradis, BETA Group, Inc., the Board’s consultant engineer, stated the proposed plan is
better from an environmental standpoint. Ms. Kramer reiterated her concerns about the proposed
change noting she is not sure if the previous decision was based on environmental concerns. Mr.
D’Urso stated he is leaning towards a “no” on this request considering the developer knew what
he was buying and more information is needed from the Conservation Commission. Mr.
Barbieri suggested holding off on making a decision pending a landscape plan and feedback
from the Conservation Commission, and instead focus on the proposed changes to units 21-24.
Mr. Paul confirmed that the proposed arborvitae are indeed deer-resistant, but asked the
applicant to make sure that London Plane trees are appropriate here. The Board paused the
discussion to open and continue the next scheduled public hearing.
●Public Hearing - Hopkinton to Ashland Transfer Line Replacement - 1) Stormwater
Management Permit Application; 2) Earth Removal Application - Eversource Energy
Mr. Paul moved to open the public hearings to be continued at the conclusion of the discussion
on Maspenock Woods, Ms. Ritterbusch seconded the hearing, and the Board voted unanimously
in favor.
●Continued Public Hearings - Maspenock Woods - Unit #31/5 West Elm St. (Amended
Site Plan//Special Permit Applications) & Units 21, 22, 23, 24 (Amended Site Plan and
Building Changes) - Maspenock Woods Realty Trust
The Board continued the discussion of the proposed changes to units 21-24. It was noted the
Board of Health had no issues with the proposal, although some of the criteria don’t apply. After
further discussion, Mr. Paul moved to approve the changes as requested, Mr. Trendel seconded
the motion. There was no public input, and the Board voted unanimously in favor.
After further discussion, Mr. D’Urso moved to continue the public hearing for proposed changes
with respect to 5 West Elm St. to September 9, 2019 and extend the decision deadline to
September 16, 2019 upon mutual agreement, Ms. Larson-Marlowe seconded the motion, and the
Board voted unanimously in favor.
The Board took a 5 minute break.
Ms. Kramer asked if there is any more news about moving the meetings to the Library, and Mr.
Gelcich he will have to follow up with the Town Manager but in the meantime it has come to his
attention that there is a problem with the Town Hall elevator and that while it is being fixed all
meetings have to be in the basement because of ADA requirements.
●Continued Public Hearings - Hopkinton to Ashland Transfer Line Replacement - 1)
Stormwater Management Permit Application; 2) Earth Removal Application -
Eversource Energy
Richard Paquette, Jr., TRC, Senior Project Manager, Sean Berthiaume, Eversource Energy,
Project Engineer, and Matthew Waldrip, Eversource Energy, Senior Specialist, appeared before
the Board. Mr. Paquette proceeded with a PowerPoint presentation on the applications before
the Board. He noted the pipeline was installed in the early 1950’s in an existing easement, and
the company will be increasing the diameter of the existing pipe from 6 to 12 inches in places
where this has not already been done to fix an existing pressure drop in the system. He noted the
line starts at the Wilson St. gate station in Hopkinton and ends at the Pond St. gate station in
Ashland. He noted construction will be phased out over the course of 5 years at 4,000 ft./year
during the summer construction season starting in 2020, starting in Hopkinton and ending in
Ashland, with the new transfer line expected to be fully in service in 2024. He stated the project
is strictly limited to pipe replacement, and no above ground facilities are proposed such as
metering stations. He noted the project crosses Cross St. and Legacy Farms North in Hopkinton
involving 10 properties within the existing easement in Hopkinton. Mr. Paquette noted the
project is subject to review by multiple state and federal agencies and it is also being reviewed
by the Energy Facilities Siting Board. He noted as part of the public outreach for the project
they have had a number of open houses and meetings with town officials when the project was
first kicked off in 2017, including a few open houses in Hopkinton. He continued with the slide
presentation, offering additional commentary as deemed necessary. Mr. Paquette stated a scenic
road application is necessary for temporary stone wall removal on Cross St., and it was noted this
application is incomplete at this time pending an actual application and a valid abutters list.
The applicant proceeded with the slide show and provided additional details as requested by the
Board. It was noted they worked with the developer of Legacy Farms North and were able to
replace a portion of the transfer line in that area already to avoid having to go back and open up
the road again. He added they thoroughly checked those areas and they were found to be outside
of the jurisdiction of the Conservation Commission. Mr. Trendel asked about the overall impact
on the wetlands, and Mr. Paquette noted it concerns a total of 5 resource areas and the
Conservation Commission already reviewed the project and issued an Order of Conditions. Mr.
Waldrip explained the delay in filing with the Planning Board for Stormwater Management and
Earth Removal Permits, stating they did not think the project would trip the thresholds. The
Board paused the conversation to open the next scheduled public hearing.
●Continued Public Hearing - 9 B Street - Special Permit Application - Historic
Structures - Newbridge Investments LLC
Mr. D’Urso moved to open the public hearing on the application by Newbridge Investments LLC
and consider the applicant’s request to withdraw the application without prejudice. Ms.
Larson-Marlowe seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Ms.
Ritterbusch noted she heard from someone on the Historical Commission that the applicant felt
the Board was not receptive to his proposal which is why he decided to withdraw their
application, however that is not how she remembers the first hearing. She stated she is
disappointed to hear about the request to withdraw because she was hoping they would preserve
the structure, and Mr. Gelcich noted it is his understanding that they intend to construct
something that looks historical. Ms. Kramer stated the issue of unmerging a merged lot was the
complicating factor in this case. After further discussion Mr. D’Urso moved to allow the
applicant to withdraw the special permit application without prejudice, Mr. Paul seconded the
motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor.
●Continued Public Hearings - Hopkinton to Ashland Transfer Line Replacement - 1)
Stormwater Management Permit Application; 2) Earth Removal Application -
Eversource Energy
Mr. Paquette continued with the PowerPoint presentation. He stated from a stormwater
management standpoint they are not building structures or creating impervious surface and it
essentially is an erosion sediment control project. He noted there is no need for
post-construction measures or building detention basins and the goal is to return the area to
pre-construction conditions following best management practices and setting up erosion controls.
He noted they will need to follow the SWPPP and comply with DEP and Conservation
Commission conditions imposed as part of the project. Mr. Paquette referred to comments
received from BETA, Board of Health and Town Counsel, and stated they are still working on
written responses to the Board but are ready for a quick overview. Ms. Kramer noted the Board
at this point wants to hear from BETA and the Principal Planner and give the public an
opportunity to weigh in.
Mr. Paradis noted the project will not have a lot of permanent impact in terms of stormwater
drainage but there will obviously be significant work in the easement itself and tree clearing to
get to the site. He noted BETA has reviewed the Notice of Intent filed with the Conservation
Commission, and the necessary procedures will be followed for crossing the wetlands including
matting. He summarized BETA’s comments with respect to compliance with the stormwater
standards. Mr. Paradis stated he essentially wants the Board to be on top of the SWPPP and be
notified when the site is stabilized. He noted BETA has some suggestions for a few conditions
to be included as part of the decision.
Ms. Larson-Marlowe stated the application refers to an unknown amount of soil to be transported
off site, and she asked if there is any special consideration for soil removal/disturbance in places
where pesticides were used. Mr. Paradis stated contaminated soil has to stay on site and he
believes the plan shows an area for stockpiling, but the decision could include a condition to that
effect. Mr. Waldrip described the process to be followed for taking materials off site. He noted
the contractor will typically take the material to a secure laydown area, not necessarily in
Hopkinton but in close proximity to the site. He noted the laydown yard would facilitate any
required sampling, and what they will be sampling for will depend on the disposal facility,
however, some places have specific requirements regarding herbicides and pesticides. Ms.
Kramer noted they know the soils here have to be handled carefully and probably should not be
taken away and carted back. Mr. Berthiaume noted they intend to keep the soil on site until the
pipe is installed and the trench is backfilled and any excess soil would be removed at that point.
He noted they usually don’t end up with a lot of excess soil and the goal is to keep as much of it
on the site as possible.
Mr. Gelcich noted Mr. Paradis has covered the stormwater aspect very well and he has no further
comments on the earth removal application, but would like to refer to comments received from
Town Counsel and the Board of Health regarding the abandonment of the existing pipe. He
noted the Board of Health is concerned about the chemicals in the pipe and recommends flushing
before abandonment and Town Counsel also wants the Planning Board to address that issue. Ms.
Kramer passed the concerns on to the applicants to be addressed at the next meeting.
Bob Foster, 85 Frankland Rd., noted the pipeline goes through the rear of his property probably
for about 150 ft. or so. He noted the state required Eversource to show a possible alternative
route, but that turned out having to tear up the street and he is opposed to that. Mr. Foster stated
Eversource refers to this work as a “replacement” project, suggesting that the 6 in. pipe will be
replaced with a 12 in. pipe, however it should be noted that the existing 6 in. will remain in
place. He noted his concern is primarily going to be with the construction process. He noted
when they originally installed the pipeline, they encountered a lot of very large boulders which
were disposed of outside the easement. He noted he attended at least 2 of the public meetings
and was assured that will not be happening this time, but based on the amount of excavation and
site conditions he is sceptical because they will have to dispose of some very large rocks that
cannot be used as backfill and have to go somewhere. He stated he is pretty sure there will be a
lot of trucks going back and forth and it is a long way from Cross St., through the wetlands, to
the easement. Mr. Foster noted it is not only a question about disposal of soil and rocks, but also
how they will protect the existing pipeline because he does not want to see East Hopkinton
disappear in a big cloud. He noted he has confidence in the ability of the Town’s Conservation
Commission, DPW and other departments to supervise this project and make sure it is done
safely, but it won’t be easy. Mr. Foster asked when the project is scheduled to start and how
long it will last. He noted the Conservation Commission has issued an Order of Conditions and
he has seen the plan, but he would like to know if there is any overlap with the Planning Board in
terms of oversight and who will actually be tasked with supervision during construction.
Mr. Gelcich stated Town Counsel suggested including a condition requiring the applicant to pay
for the Board’s consultant engineer to monitor construction, overseeing the SWPPP, stormwater
and earth removal issues. He stated he assumes the Conservation Commission’s consultant
would oversee work in their jurisdiction. Ms. Kramer stated she believes the overall project will
last from 2020 to 2024, with the Hopkinton portion to be done during 2020 and 2021. Mr. Foster
stated he understands the company won’t be disposing of any soil within the easement, and the
applicants nodded in agreement.
Katie Towner, 9 Kruger Rd., referred to the letter from the Board of Health about flushing the
abandoned pipe, and stated she would like the Planning Board to ask the applicant to identify the
hazardous materials. She noted she understands it concerns hazardous materials routinely
removed by the pipeline company as part of their normal operations, and it is only right that they
are publicly listed. She noted she would be surprised if there is no such report which would be
similar to what has been submitted to the Board for other applications. She stated care has to be
taken to prevent the surrounding soils from being contaminated during the flushing process and it
sounds like this should be done by a hazardous material reclamation company. She stated the
Board should ask BETA why they did not bring this up. Ms. Towner stated the applicant did not
seem to acknowledge that they should not be removing contaminated soil off site, and this issue
should be further pursued. Mr. Gelcich stated he is not sure where it came from, but the Board
of Health has a long spreadsheet of chemicals found in gas pipelines and it would be great if
Eversource could confirm the list or provide their own. He noted the Board of Health explained
the process of flushing the lines but it is beyond his scope. Ms. Kramer noted they need to find
out how that process is managed and by whom.
Sean Morrow, 88 Frankland Rd., asked about the distance between the new and old pipe, the
type of construction vehicles to be used, and how they will get to the construction area. Mr.
Morrow stated he is very concerned about potential contamination as a by-product of the project,
but he does not know what types of pollutants could be involved or how it can be prevented, so
he would rely on the Town to make sure the proper process if followed and appropriate
safeguards are taken. Ms. Kramer stated that would be another question for the Board of Health.
Ms. Ritterbusch moved to continue the public hearings to September 9, 2019 at 7:30 P.M. and
extend the decision deadlines to September 16, 2019 by mutual agreement, Mr. D’Urso seconded
the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor.
Mr. Trendel moved to adjourn, Mr. D’Urso seconded the motion, and the Board voted
unanimously in favor.
Adjourned: 10:00 P.M.
Submitted by: Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant
Approved ______________
Documents used at the Meeting:
●Agenda, Hopkinton Planning Board, Monday, July 22, 2019
●Memorandum to Planning Board from John Gelcich, Principal Planner, re: Items on Planning Board Agenda,
July 22, 2019
●Landscape plan for Maspenock Woods in the vicinity of Units 21-24, dated 8 July 2019, prepared by Copley
Wolff Design Group
●Electrical Site Plan - Frankland Road Solar, 71 Frankland Road, Hopkinton, MA 01748, prepared by Larson
Engineering Inc.
●PowerPoint presentation - LNG Line Replacement Project (Eversource Energy); Letter to John Gelcich,
Principal Planner, Hopkinton Planning Board, from Anthony Lupo, Staff Engineer, and Philip F. Paradis, Jr.,
PE, Associate, BETA Group, Inc., dated July 8, 2019 re: Hopkinton - Eversource Transfer Line Stormwater
Peer Review
●Draft Invitation for Bids (for peer review services)
●Massachusetts Department of Transportation - Schedule of Public Information Meetings for the I-495/I-90
Interchange Improvements Projects, July 25 through August 1, 2019
●Draft Minutes - Hopkinton Planning Board - June 24, 2019
○
9/3/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Whisper Way
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1643680333558398067&simpl=msg-f%3A16436803335…1/1
John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
Whisper Way
Phil Paradis <PParadis@beta-inc.com>Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 2:35 PM
To: Dan Hazen <DHazen@gandhengineering.com>, John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
Cc: RON NATION <r.nation@comcast.net>, Don MacAdam <dmacadam@hopkintonma.gov>
Dan,
All good. As we discussed I am going to recommend a condition that final driveway layouts be reviewed and approved by
the fire department prior to issuing a building permit.
[Quoted text hidden]
[Quoted text hidden]
Long Term Operation and Maintenance Plan
The following shall serve as the (O&M) Plan required by Standard 9, as well as the Long Term
Pollution Prevention Plan required by Standard 4.
A. Names of Persons or Entity Responsible for Plan Compliance;
Applicant: 20th Century Homes
PO Box 152
Hopkinton, MA 01748
508-435-5901
B. Good housekeeping practices
1. Maintain site, landscaping and vegetation.
2. Sweep and pick up litter on pavements and grounds.
3. Deliveries shall be monitored by owners or representative to ensure that if any spillage
occurs, it shall be contained and cleaned up immediately.
4. Maintain pavement and curbing in good repair.
C. Requirements for routine inspections and maintenance of stormwater BMPs
1. Plans: The stormwater Operation and Maintenance Plan shall consist of all Plans,
documents and all local state and federal approvals as required for the subject property.
2. Record Keeping:
a. Maintain a log of all operation and maintenance activities for at least three years
following construction, including inspections, repairs, replacement and disposal
(for disposal, the log shall indicate the type of material and the disposal location);
b. Make this log available to MassDEP and the Conservation Commission upon
request; and
c. Allow MassDEP and the Conservation Commission to inspect each BMP to
determine whether the responsible party is implementing the Operation and
Maintenance Plan.
3. Descriptions and Designs: The Best Management Practices (BMP) incorporated into the
design include the following;
a. Street Sweeping – Stipulated within the Construction Period Pollution Prevention
Plan, the Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan, and the Operation and
Maintenance Plan. As the amount of TSS removal is discretionary, no credit was
taken within the calculations for this BMP.
b. Deep sump catch basins with hoods installed to promote TSS Removal of solids
and control floatable pollutants. This BMP has a design rate of 25% TSS Removal.
c. Contech Water Quality M.H. with a design rate of 80% TSS Removal.
d. Infiltration basin to provide the required recharge as well as provide an additional
80% TSS Removal. Refer to TSS Removal Worksheet in Standard 4 for treatment
train.
4. BMP Maintenance: After construction it is the responsibility of the owner to perform
maintenance. The cleaning of the components of the stormwater management system
shall generally be as follows:
a. Roadway: The owner shall keep the roadway swept with a mechanical sweeper or
hand swept semi-annually at a minimum.
b. Catch Basins and Oil/Grit Separator: Shall be cleaned by excavating, pumping or
vacuuming. The sediment shall be disposed of off-site by the Owner. Inspect
quarterly, remove silt when ¼ full.
c. Contech treatment unit shall be inspected and cleaned in accordance with
manufacturers recommendations.
d. Infiltration Basins: Inspect twice per year and after every major event for the first
few months. Mow basin at least twice per year. Clean sediment out of basin 2
times per year.
5. Access Provisions: All of the components of the storm water system will be accessible
by the Owner
D. Spill prevention and response plans
1. Inventory materials to be present on site during construction.
2. Train employees and subcontractors in prevention and clean up procedures.
3. All materials stored on site will be stored in their appropriate containers under a roof.
4. Follow manufacturers recommendation for disposal of used containers.
5. Store only enough product on site to do the job.
6. On site equipment, fueling and maintenance measures:
a. Inspect on-site vehicles and equipment daily for leaks.
b. Conduct all vehicle and equipment maintenance and refueling in one location,
away from storm drains.
c. Perform major repairs and maintenance off site.
d. Use drip pans, drip cloths or absorbent pads when replacing spent fuels.
e. Collect spent fuels and remove from site.
7. Clean up spills.
a. Never hose down “dirty” pavement or impermeable surfaces where fluids have
spilled. Use dry clean up methods (sawdust, cat litter and/or rags and absorbent
pads).
b. Sweep up dry materials immediately. Never wash them away or bury them.
c. Clean up spills on dirt areas by digging up and properly disposing of contaminated
soil.
d. Report significant spills to the Fire Department, Conservation Commission and
Board of Health.
E. Provisions for maintenance of lawns, gardens, and other landscaped areas
Use only organic fertilizer. Dispose of clippings outside of the 100 wetland foot buffer zone to
the adjacent wetland and 125 foot vernal pool buffer.
F. Requirements for storage and use of herbicides, and pesticides
The application of herbicides or pesticides will be done by professional certified contractor.
G. Provisions for operation and management of septic system
Site to be serviced by septic systems. Septic systems shall be maintained in accordance with
Hopkinton Board of Health and Massachusetts Title 5 regulations.
H. Provisions for solid waste management
1. Waste Management Plan
a. Dumpster for trash and bulk waste collection shall be stored inside or under a roof.
b. Recycle materials whenever possible (paper, plaster cardboard, metal cans).
Separate containers for material is recommended.
c. Do not bury waste and debris on site.
d. Certified haulers will be hired to remove the dumpster container waste as needed.
Recycling products will also be removed off site weekly.
I. Snow disposal and plowing plans relative to Wetland Resource Areas
Snow storage is adequate around the site for large storm events.
J. Winter Road Salt and/or Sand Use and Storage restrictions
No sand, salt, or chemicals for de-icing will be stored outside.
K. Roadway vegetation maintenance
Vegetation within the roadway right of way shall be mowed as needed to provide adequate
sight distance for vehicles exiting the driveways within the subdivision. Landscaping within
the right of way shall be low growing stock not to exceed 18-inches at maturity. Herbicides
shall not be used for vegetation maintenance.
L. Street sweeping schedules
Sweeping, the act of cleaning pavement can be done by mechanical sweepers, vacuum sweeper
or hand sweeper. The quantity of sand is a direct correlation with the treatment of ice and snow
and the types of chemicals and spreaders that are being used on site to manage snow. If a liquid
de-icer such as calcium chloride is used as a pretreatment to new events the amount of sand is
minimized. Sweeping for this site should be done semi-annually at a minimum. Collecting the
particulate before it enters the catch basins is cheaper and more environmentally friendly than
in a catch basin mixing with oils and greases in the surface water runoff in catch basins.
M. Provisions for prevention of illicit discharges to the stormwater management system
The discharge into the stormwater system is not being violated, see attachment for illicit
discharges compliance.
N. Training the staff or personnel involved with implementing Long-Term Pollution Prevention
Plan
The owner shall develop policies and procedures for containing the illicit spilling of oils, soda,
beer, paper and litter. These wastes provide a degrading of the water quality. The placement of
signs and trash barrels with lids around the site would contribute to a clean water quality site
conditions.
O. List of Emergency contacts for implementing Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan:
20th Century Homes
PO Box 152
Hopkinton, MA 01748
508-435-5901
This shall be the contact until such time as the project is sold or the roads are accepted by the
Town.
Owner
Applicant
Contractor
TOWN OF HOPKINTON
DEPARTMENT OF
LAND USE, PLANNING AND PERMITTING
TOWN HALL
18 MAIN STREET
HOPKINTON, MA 01748
508-497-9745
www.hopkintonma.gov
DRAFT Decision
Subject Property:1 Whisper Way,3 Whisper Way,5 Whisper Way,129 Wood Street,0
Wood Street,0 Wood Street;Hopkinton Assessors Map R16 Block 55 Lot
0,Map R16 Block 56 Lot 0,R16 Block 26 Lot 0,Map U14 Block 27 Lot
0, Map U14, Block 28 Lot 0, Map U14 Block 28 Lot A.
Project Name: “Whisper Ridge” Subdivision
Subject:Application of 20th Century Homes –Ron Nation for Amendment to
Special Permit pursuant to Article XVII,Open Space and Landscape
Preservation Development of the Hopkinton Zoning Bylaw
Applicant:20th Century Homes – Ron Nation, P.O. Box 152, Hopkinton, MA
Owners:Donna M.McIntyre,1 Whisper Way,Hopkinton,MA;Ravenwood LLC
ADDRESS
Date:September XX, 2019
A.Procedural History
1.An Application for an amendment to the previously granted Special Permit was filed by the
referenced Applicants on July 23,2019 for a special permit pursuant to Article XVII,Open
Space and Landscape Preservation Development (the “OSLPD Bylaw”)of the Hopkinton
Zoning Bylaw,including approval of an amended Open Space and Landscape Preservation
Development Concept Plan entitled “Whisper Way a Definitive Open Space Subdivision in
Hopkinton Massachusetts”,prepared by Guerriere &Halnon,Inc.,dated May 24,2018,
revised August 20,2019,showing 12 building lots on property located at 5 Whisper Way
(Map R16 Block 26 Lot 0),129 Wood Street (Map U14 Block 27 Lot 0),0 Wood Street
(Map U14 Block 28 Lot 0), and 0 Wood Street (Map U14 Block 28 Lot A).
2.An Application for the proposed amendment to the Special Permit was originally submitted
on April 19,2019,with hearing dates on May 13,2019;June 10,2019;July 8,2019;and
August 12,2019.An Application for the proposed amendment to the Subdivision Plan was
submitted on May 24,2018,with hearing dates on August 27,2018;October 1,2018;
October 29,2018;November 19,2018;May 13,2019;June 10,2019;July 8,2019,and
August 12,2019.Dates that the application was on the agenda but was not discussed were
December 3,2018;December 17,2018;January 14,2019;February 25,2019;and March 25,
2019. Both applications were withdrawn on August 12, 2019.
3.A public hearing on the Application was held on August 12, 2019 and September 9, 2019.
4.The Application was accompanied and augmented by plans entitled “Phasing Plan”prepared
by Guerriere &Halnon,Inc.,dated August 20,2019 and “Conventional Subdivision Plan
Whisper Ridge in Hopkinton,MA”,prepared by Guerriere &Halnon,Inc.,dated November
21, 2017; each of which depicts a conventional plan layout for the Subject Property.
5.The Concept Plan and other submission materials were reviewed by the Planning Board and
were submitted for comment to Town departments and officials as required.Throughout its
deliberations,the Planning Board has been mindful of the statements of the Applicants,their
consultants and representatives,and the comments of the general public,all as made at the
public hearing.
6.The Applicants have requested the following waivers from the provisions of the Subdivision
Regulations:
●§5.4.1.N Definitive Plan Contents:Cross sections of each street at 50 foot intervals
-Requesting to draw cross sections at station 0+50,1+00,1 +50 and station 5+60 only
per review engineer recommendations.
●§5.4.1.R Definitive Plan Contents:Trees to be retained within the right of way to be
shown,Due to the narrow width of the right of way and the required grading for the
roadway, no trees will be able to be retained within the right of way.
●§5.4.1.Y Definitive Plan Contents:The applicant is requesting that street lights not be
installed within the subdivision but to install driveway lights at the intersections of
the driveway and road no higher than 8-feet and in compliance with dark sky lighting
principles.
●§8.2.6.A Side slopes:Road side slopes 3:1 max.To bring the existing Whisper Way
into compliance with the requirements for a maximum road slope of 10%,the side
slope abutting the Town forest in certain sections will need to be reduced to a 2:1
slope and vegetated and stabilized.
●§8.2.7.A Disturbance to Natural Topography:Due to the wetlands at station 1+50,
depths of fill are greater than 8 feet to facilitate the crossings.
●§8.2.7.B Disturbance to Natural Topography:No infrastructure construction on slopes
greater than 25%.The road and lots have been configured to minimize impacts and
construction in areas greater than 25%.
2
●§8.4.10 Stormwater Basin Embankments:Side slopes of detention ponds 3:1.Due to
the buffer constraints,an impervious core has been added to the pond to reduce the
side slopes to 2: 1 while maintaining the top of berm width of 10 feet.
●§8.4.10 Stormwater Basin Embankments:Detention basin edges located 25 feet from
houses,property lines and roadway.Due to environmental setbacks and existing
property ownership the area for the basin is greatly reduced.
7.The Applicants have requested the following waivers from the provisions of the OSLPD
Bylaw:
●§210-113.C.1 Buffer areas:Buffer of a minimum of 100 feet.Due to the
configuration of the existing parcel,one point of the open space will be reduced to
25.00 feet.The open space in the remaining portion of the site will be a minimum of
100-feet and greater.This one area point abuts Town of Hopkinton property and will
not impact homeowners.
●§210-111.Lot Frontage Depth:Due to the steep slopes and wetlands located on the
site,common driveways will be utilized to minimize wetland impacts.This requires
that the lots be configured in a way that does not lend itself to strict compliance with
the Lot Frontage Depth.The Lot Frontage Depth can be waived as stated in §21
0-111A.to achieve the purpose of the Open Space and Landscape Preservation
article. The waiver is requested for lots 5 and 6 only.
B.Special Permit Criteria
Section 210-115.A (3)of the OSLPD Bylaw states that the Special Permit shall be granted only
if the Planning Board finds each of the following:
(a)The development meets the purpose of an open space and landscape preservation
development as described in § 210-106.
(b)The development standards contained in § 210-112.A (1) through (4) have been met.
(c)The common open space is designed in accordance with the standards set forth in §
210-113.B.
(d)The common open space is designed in accordance with the standards set forth in §
210-113.C.
(e)The parcel could be developed as a conventional subdivision under existing local,state
and federal land use regulations.
3
(f)The open space and landscape preservation development provides for efficient use and
delivery of municipal and other services and infrastructure.
In accordance with Section 210-223 of the Zoning Bylaw,special permits,where granted,must
be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Bylaw and may be subject to
appropriate conditions.
C.Discussion
At the public hearing,the Applicants and their consultants described the proposed development.
The design of the open space was discussed,including its proximity to existing open space
owned by the Town.Discussion was held regarding improvements to and extension of the
existing Whisper Way,which is a private way.Public comment was received at the public
hearing,and questions and issues raised were discussed.The Board reviewed the materials
submitted by the Applicants.It was noted that the OSLPD Bylaw requires a minimum of 50%of
a site be set aside as permanent open space,and this plan would provide 51.1%.The Board
discussed the waiver requests.Comments received from the Board’s engineering consultant
were noted.The plan was revised throughout the public hearing process in response to the
comments and questions raised by the Board and its consultants,and the public,all at the public
hearings.The application was withdrawn and subsequently resubmitted in the same hearing,on
August 12,2019,as repeated absences and an election had taken place during the public hearing
process, renderings several Board members ineligible to vote on the application.
D.General Findings of Fact
1.The Subject Property consists of 40.18 acres with frontage on Whisper Way,a private way,
and Wood Street.The property contains four (4)single family homes,but is predominantly
wooded.Three (3)of the single family homes would be razed;one (1)would remain on a
subdivision lot.
2.The Subject Property is located in the Agricultural Zoning District,Residence B Zoning
District, and the Water Resources Protection Overlay District.
3.The Concept Plan shows twelve (12)house lots and one (1)contiguous common open space
parcels.The new street would be approximately 1,000 feet in length,and includes
reconstruction of the existing Whisper Way.
4.The Concept Plan indicates that the definitive subdivision plan would create 20.99 acres of
permanent open space in one parcel of land, 52.2% of the site.
5.The currently proposed development includes nine (9)new dwelling units,therefore the
Flexible Community Development (FCD) Bylaw no longer applies to the project.
E.Specific Findings
4
1.In view of the foregoing,the Planning Board voted on February 26,2018 to make the
following findings relative to the OSLPD Bylaw:
A.That the Development Standards contained in § 210-112.A have been met.
The Applicants have provided information which demonstrates that the development will not
cause unreasonable traffic congestion or unsafe conditions within and outside of the
development and will provide for convenient and safe emergency vehicle access.The
development will preserve the natural features of the property by adapting the location of
structures and ways to the existing topography and the Concept Plan identifies and ensures
the preservation of significant and special natural features,including wetlands and trail
connections to existing public open space.
B.That the Special Permit Criteria have been met, as set forth below;
Criterion (a)-The development meets the purpose of an open space and landscape
preservation development as described in § 210-106.
The Concept Plan complies in all respects with the requirements of §210-106.The Concept
Plan shows a subdivision which is an alternative to a conventional subdivision that provides
for the preservation of permanent open space and development which is designed to
accommodate the site’s physical characteristics.Approval of the subdivision will not make
undevelopable land developable or permit an increase in the number of building lots that
would otherwise be possible on a conventional plan,and provides for the preservation of
important site features, such as stone walls and wetlands.
Criterion (b)-The development standards contained in §210-112.A (1)through (4)have
been met.
The Board found that the development standards were met, as noted in A. above.
Criterion (c)-The common open space is designed in accordance with the standards set
forth in § 210-113.B.
The open space area would be maintained in its natural state,with the exception of
stormwater management components as conceptually noted on the Concept Plan.It is not
anticipated that any of the open space will be covered by man-made impervious surfaces,and
it is anticipated that the clearing for drainage improvements will not exceed 5%of common
open space parcels.
Criterion (d)-The common open space is designed in accordance with the standards set
forth in § 210-113.C.
The common open space is designed in accordance with the standards as detailed in the
Zoning Bylaw.A waiver had been previously granted for the 100-foot perimeter buffer to
5
adjacent property,however the revised plan as submitted and reviewed no longer requires
that waiver and the 100-foot buffer will be provided as required.
Criterion (e)-The parcel could be developed as a conventional subdivision under existing
local, state and federal land use regulations.
The Applicants submitted a sketch of a conventional subdivision plan.The conventional
plan could be approved by the Planning Board as it meets the applicable requirements of the
Subdivision Regulations.
Criterion (f)-The open space and landscape preservation development provides for efficient
use and delivery of municipal and other services and infrastructure.
The proposed roadway will provide for the efficient use and delivery of services and
infrastructure, as well as access for emergency services.
C.That the use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Bylaw.
The Concept Plan is consistent with the purpose of the Open Space and Landscape
Preservation Development bylaw by preserving open space and natural features in perpetuity
and by a design which accommodates the site’s physical characteristics.
The following members of the Planning Board vote to make the findings stated above:
Muriel Kramer
Gary Trendel
Francis D’Urso
David Paul
Amy Ritterbusch
Deborah Fein-Brug
Mary Larson Marlowe
Robert Benson, Jr.
No members of the Planning Board voted in opposition.
F.Decision and Conditions
In view of the foregoing findings,the Planning Board voted on September 9,2019 to grant the
OSLPD Special Permit and to approve the Concept Plan entitled “Whisper Way a Definitive
Open Space Subdivision in Hopkinton Massachusetts”,prepared by Guerriere &Halnon,Inc.,
dated May 24,2018,Revised August 20,2019.The Board’s approval is subject to the following
terms and conditions:
1.The Applicant requests the following waivers from the provisions of the Subdivision
Regulations and the OSLPD Bylaw:
6
●§5.4.1.N Definitive Plan Contents:Cross sections of each street at 50 foot intervals
-Requesting to draw cross sections at station 0+50,1+00,1 +50 and station 5+60 only
per review engineer recommendations.
●§5.4.1.R Definitive Plan Contents:Trees to be retained within the right of way to be
shown,Due to the narrow width of the right of way and the required grading for the
roadway, no trees will be able to be retained within the right of way.
●§5.4.1.Y Definitive Plan Contents:The applicant is requesting that street lights not be
installed within the subdivision but to install driveway lights at the intersections of
the driveway and road no higher than 8-feet and in compliance with dark sky lighting
principles.
●§8.2.6.A Side slopes:Road side slopes 3:1 max.To bring the existing Whisper Way
into compliance with the requirements for a maximum road slope of 10%,the side
slope abutting the Town forest in certain sections will need to be reduced to a 2:1
slope and vegetated and stabilized.
●§8.2.7.A Disturbance to Natural Topography:Due to the wetlands at station 1+50,
depths of fill are greater than 8 feet to facilitate the crossings.
●§8.2.7.B Disturbance to Natural Topography:No infrastructure construction on slopes
greater than 25%.The road and lots have been configured to minimize impacts and
construction in areas greater than 25%.
●§8.4.10 Stormwater Basin Embankments:Side slopes of detention ponds 3:1.Due to
the buffer constraints,an impervious core has been added to the pond to reduce the
side slopes to 2: 1 while maintaining the top of berm width of 10 feet.
●§8.4.10 Stormwater Basin Embankments:Detention basin edges located 25 feet from
houses,property lines and roadway.Due to environmental setbacks and existing
property ownership the area for the basin is greatly reduced.
●§210-113.C.1 Buffer areas:Buffer of a minimum of 100 feet.Due to the
configuration of the existing parcel,one point of the open space will be reduced to
25.00 feet.The open space in the remaining portion of the site will be a minimum of
100-feet and greater.This one area point abuts Town of Hopkinton property and will
not impact homeowners.
●§210-111.Lot Frontage Depth:Due to the steep slopes and wetlands located on the
site,common driveways will be utilized to minimize wetland impacts.This requires
that the lots be configured in a way that does not lend itself to strict compliance with
the Lot Frontage Depth.The Lot Frontage Depth can be waived as stated in §21
7
0-111A.to achieve the purpose of the Open Space and Landscape Preservation
article. The waiver is requested for lots 5 and 6 only.
The Board grants the requested waivers.
2.The definitive subdivision plan shall contain a maximum of 12 building lots. The number of
lots is based on all of the information received during the public hearing process.
3.The definitive subdivision plan for the property shall show the open space parcel(s)to be
created. The following materials shall be submitted with the definitive subdivision plan:1)
identification of the entity which will own the open space;2)identification of the entity
which will hold the conservation restriction (unless the land will be conveyed to the Town);
and 3) a draft conservation restriction, if appropriate.
4.Due to the location and size of wetland resource areas and the proposed configuration of the
road layout and lots,the Applicant is encouraged to file a Notice of Intent concurrently with
the Conservation Commission when the definitive subdivision plan application is filed with
the Planning Board.A concurrent process will allow for maximum coordination and
collaboration on the final design of the subdivision.
5.Stormwater Management: In addition to the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations,
Section 8.4,Stormwater Management,the definitive subdivision plan shall comply with the
Massachusetts DEP Stormwater Regulations and the following conditions:
(a)No additional stormwater runoff volume shall be deposited onto any abutting property,
including land across Wood Street,without the written permission of the property owner.
Such written permission shall be submitted with the definitive subdivision plan. If no
written permission is provided,the plan shall not show runoff in excess of current
volumes beyond the property line in that location. The Applicant shall submit all
information necessary to document pre-and post-development stormwater runoff
volumes in those areas.
(b)The drainage system shown on the definitive plan shall be designed to ensure that the
water quality of the stormwater runoff is not detrimental to the wetlands and receiving
water bodies.
(c)Stormwater management facilities,including detention,retention and infiltration basins,
shall be designed to appear like natural landforms and shall be integrated with the
topography of the area as much as possible.
(d)The definitive subdivision plan submission shall include an Operation and Maintenance
Plan for all elements of the stormwater management system. The plan should include
identification of the entity responsible for maintenance and inspections,the frequency of
inspection/cleaning of all elements,all special requirements (if any)associated with the
facilities,and the recommended means of monitoring the performance of the proposed
8
facilities. Such plan shall be written in an organized manner with step by step
instructions.
7.The definitive subdivision plan shall specifically call out the limit of clearing,both temporary
(for construction)and permanent,required for all work in the subdivision,including homes,
septic systems, driveways, lawns, roads, and stormwater management system components.
8.Proof of secured easements shall be provided by the Applicant with the definitive subdivision
plan submittal for all work proposed for land under separate ownership and/or off-site.
9.No open space,no-cut easements or other restricted areas shown on the definitive subdivision
plan shall be used for storage of construction vehicles,building materials,stockpiled loam or
other material during construction.
10.The definitive subdivision plan shall be designed to be consistent with the approved Concept
Plan.
11.The Applicant shall work with the Town to design a parking area for horse trailers within the
open space area on the northeast corner of the property.The area shall be shown on the
definitive subdivision plan.
12.Each building lot shall include an aesthetically pleasing low-level lighting system at the end
of the driveway,adjacent to the roadway,to provide emergency services with assistance in
identifying street numbers.
13.A minimum of four (4)dwelling units are to be outfitted with sprinkler systems for fire
protection. These dwelling units must include those on Lots 1, 5, 11, and 12.
14.The covenants for the development shall include provisions compliant with dark sky
principles such as lighting only being on when needed,only lighting the area that needs the
lighting,having the lights be no brighter than necessary,minimizing blue light emissions,
and having fully shielded (downward pointing)lighting,as specified by the International
Dark-Sky Association.
15.The project shall maintain existing walking trails where possible,as well as make a concerted
effort to establish new, publicly accessible trails within the on-site open space.
16.Final driveway layout and design shall be shown to provide adequate access for emergency
vehicles as determined by the Fire Chief.
The following members of the Planning Board vote to grant the Special Permits and approve the
Concept Plan subject to the above-stated terms and conditions:
9
Muriel Kramer
Gary Trendel
Francis D’Urso
David Paul
Amy Ritterbusch
Deborah Fein-Brug
Mary Larson Marlowe
Robert Benson, Jr.
No members of the Planning Board voted in opposition to the grant of the Special Permit.
.
Muriel Kramer, Chair
Appeals of this Decision,if any,shall be made pursuant to MGL c.40A s.17 and shall be filed
within twenty (20)days after the date of filing of this Decision with the office of the Town
Clerk.
This Special Permit shall become void within two (2)years from the date of issue in accordance
with Section 210-223 of the Zoning Bylaw.This Special Permit shall not be effective until filed
with the Registry of Deeds by the Applicant.
cc:Guerriere & Halnon, Inc.
BETA Group, Inc.
Conservation Commission
Director of Municipal Inspections
Fire Department
Director of Public Works
Board of Health
10
8/27/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - RE: 76 Main Street
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1642958257407505898&simpl=msg-f%3A16429582574…1/3
John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
RE: 76 Main Street
6 messages
Kathi Sherry <kathi@onlinecommunications.net>Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 3:18 PM
To: John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
Cc: "planningboardchair@hopkintonma.gov" <planningboardchair@hopkintonma.gov>, Paul Mastroianni
<paulm@onlinecommunications.net>
We are withdrawing our application for Site Plan Review for 76 Main Street at this time. Please remove the project from
the September 9th Planning Board Meeting Agenda.
Thank you –
Kathi
From: Kathi Sherry
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 10:30 AM
To: John Gelcich (jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov)
Cc: planningboardchair@hopkintonma.gov; Paul Mastroianni (paulm@onlinecommunications.net)
Subject: 76 Main Street - July 22nd Planning Board Meeting
Hi John –
We are requesting that our site plan application for the 76 Main Street project be put on hold as we pursue our legal
options regarding the historic district designation.
You can remove the project from the July 22nd Planning Board Meeting Agenda.
Thank you –
Kathi
Kathi Sherry
REC Hopkinton LLC
E: kathi@onlinecommunications.net
P: 508.435.4031
C: 617.962.6544
77 West Main Street | Suite 213
Hopkinton, MA 01748
8/27/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - RE: 76 Main Street
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1642958257407505898&simpl=msg-f%3A16429582574…2/3
John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 3:20 PM
To: Kathi Sherry <kathi@onlinecommunications.net>
Cc: "planningboardchair@hopkintonma.gov" <planningboardchair@hopkintonma.gov>, Paul Mastroianni
<paulm@onlinecommunications.net>
Hi Kathi -
Just to confirm, you intend to withdraw - not continue - the application for 76 Main Street, correct? If you withdraw, the
Board will vote to allow you to withdraw without prejudice and I will send a letter to the Town Clerk notifying him of this
action.
John
John Gelcich, AICP
Principal Planner
Town of Hopkinton
(508) 497-9745
jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov
[Quoted text hidden]
Kathi Sherry <kathi@onlinecommunications.net>Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 3:22 PM
To: John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
Cc: "planningboardchair@hopkintonma.gov" <planningboardchair@hopkintonma.gov>, Paul Mastroianni
<paulm@onlinecommunications.net>
Yes we are withdrawing.
Thank you –
Kathi
[Quoted text hidden]
All email messages and attached content sent from and to this email account are public records unless qualified as an
exemption under the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
Visit us online at www.hopkintonma.gov.
John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 3:22 PM
To: Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>
FYI
John Gelcich, AICP
Principal Planner
Town of Hopkinton
(508) 497-9745
jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov
8/27/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - RE: 76 Main Street
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f%3A1642958257407505898&simpl=msg-f%3A16429582574…3/3
[Quoted text hidden]
John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 3:25 PM
To: Kathi Sherry <kathi@onlinecommunications.net>
Cc: "planningboardchair@hopkintonma.gov" <planningboardchair@hopkintonma.gov>, Paul Mastroianni
<paulm@onlinecommunications.net>
Thank you, Kathi. I'll keep it on the agenda for September 9th so the Board can vote to allow the withdrawal but you don't
need to be there for that (if it takes place at a different time from the Chamberlain Whalen item).
John
John Gelcich, AICP
Principal Planner
Town of Hopkinton
(508) 497-9745
jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov
[Quoted text hidden]
Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 3:54 PM
To: John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
John,
Ok, that will apply to both the site plan and FCD application.
Cobi
Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant
DLUPP
Town of Hopkinton
Town Hall
18 Main St.
Hopkinton, MA 01748
Phone 508-497-9745
[Quoted text hidden]
J.D. MARQUEDANT & ASSOCIATES INC.
Land Surveying
6 Walcott Street
Hopkinton MA 01748
Phone: 508-435-4145 Fax: 508-435-0157
September 3, 2019
Mr. John Gelcich, Principal Planner
Town of Hopkinton
18 Main Street
Hopkinton MA 01748
Re: 97 South Street Hopkinton MA
Dear Mr. Gelcich
As a result of the review of the project, recently filed with the Town of Hopkinton
Conservation Commission, revisions have been made to the project designs. I offer the
following summary of the changes:
Based on a review of the site conditions wetlands flags #13, #14 and #18-#22
have been removed from the site plans. In addition, the existing detention basin
was determined to be a regulated wetlands due to the presence of wetlands
vegetation. The limit of this wetlands system was added to the design plans along
with the altered wetlands delineation mentioned above and the associated buffer
zones.
The light pole and wall mounted fixture designations have been added to the
revised designs. In addition, a typical light pole detail has been added to the
revised plans. This information had been previously submitted to your office for
review, but has been added to the design plans for further clarity.
To aid in the review of the project designs by the Conservation Commission and
its consultant Lucas Environmental LLC an additional sheet has been added to the
site designs. A Project Management Plan highlighted as Supplemental
Information outlines the limits of the various site altering activities at the project
site. This plan is number as sheet 1.90 in the revised designs.
Protocols for short and long term inspection and maintenance activities at the site
have been developed for the project. The inspection and maintenance activities
include measures for review of elements of the storm water management system
and the parking and driveway areas. Protocols outline the type of review, the
frequency of said reviews and establish a system of record keeping and report
generation for the site. A sketch plan highlighting snow storage locations has been
included with these protocols at the request of the Conservation Commission.
Copies of the revised designs and the Operations and Maintenance protocols are attached
to this memo.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please contact me with any concerns.
Regards
Joseph P Marquedant
J.D. Marquedant & Associates Inc.
Cc: Harold Nahigian
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN
THE INNOVATION PARK
Prepared for:
Southfield Properties I LLC
PO Box 701
Marlborough MA
Date: August 26, 2019
Page - 2 -
The proposed Hopkinton Innovation Park at 97 South Street Hopkinton MA drainage
system has been designed to function properly provided that routine maintenance is
performed. Maintenance of the parking areas, driveways, catch basins, manholes and
detention basin are required to ensure that sedimentation and pollution is controlled and
storm water retention capacity is sustained. To ensure the proper functioning of these
facilities the following maintenance practices will be used:
Owner and Party Responsible for Maintenance:
Southfield Properties I LLC
PO Box 701
Marlborough MA 01752
Phone: 508-481-9104
The owner shall develop a chart with a list of the following Best Management Practices
(BMP’s) with the chart listing the maintenance requirement, frequency of maintenance
and the date the maintenance was performed.
PART 1 - INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE (DURING CONSTRUCTION)
A. It shall be the responsibility of the General Contractor to ensure that the
inspection, maintenance and protection of the stormwater managem ent system
(defined in Section 2a below) is performed during the construction phase of the
project and up to final stabilization of the site (refer to attached plan).
B. The on-site stormwater management system shall be protected from the
introduction of sediments and debris both during installation and throughout the
duration of site construction in order to provide a fully functioning and long lasting
system upon completion of construction.
C. The following steps shall be implemented, at a minimum, to protect the
stormwater management system during construction:
1. During construction of the upgrades to both the existing building and the
parking areas and access driveways, any open excavation shall be protected
from on-site sediments from storm runoff and snow melt by providing a line
of erosion controls consisting of filter sock and silt fence. In the event that
the excavation is compromised by sediment, the sediments shall be removed
and the bottom of the excavation restored.
Page - 3 -
2. An inspection of the existing stormwater management system shall be
conducted by the General Contractor weekly as well as during and after all
rainstorms until the completion of construction. Provide silt sacks as
necessary for existing catch basins. In case of any noted introduction of
sediments into the system, the General Contractor shall immediately remove
said sediments and take any necessary steps to limit further introduction of
sediments and notify the engineer of any problems involving storm water
management systems.
a) The proposed stormwater management system shall be defined as the
roof leader, the existing closed drainage system of catch basins and
drain manholes and the detention basin.
b) A rainstorm shall be defined by all or one of the following thresholds:
i. Any storm in which rain is predicted to last for twelve consecutive
hours or more.
ii. Any storm for which a flash flood watch or warning is issued.
iii. Any single storm predicted to have a cumulative rainfall of greater
than one-half inch.
iv. Any storm not meeting the previous three thresholds but which
would mark a third consecutive day of measurable rainfall.
3. The General Contractor shall also inspect the stormwater management
systems at times of significant increase in surface water runoff due to rapid
thawing when the risk of sediment migration is significant.
4. All collected/removed sediments shall be removed from the site and
disposed of in a legal manner.
PART 2 - INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE (POST-CONSTRUCTION)
A. It shall be the responsibility of the Owner to ensure that the long-term inspection
and maintenance of the stormwater management system on-site is performed.
The on-site system shall include the following individual components of the
stormwater management system: existing drainage system piping, existing catch
basins, existing drain manholes, existing detention basin as shown on the
approved plans. The Owner shall obtain the services of a qualified Contractor to
perform the required inspections and maintenance of the individual components
of the stormwater management system on-site, as listed above. All inspections
and maintenance of the components of the stormwater management system.
B. It shall be the responsibility of the Owner to maintain adequate records to
demonstrate conformance with this inspection and maintenance plan.
Page - 4 -
C. The inspection and maintenance plan for the on-site stormwater management
system (as listed in Section A above) shall be carried out by the current owner
(project applicant) and by any and all future owners of the site in perpetuity.
D. The inspection and maintenance plan shall be carried out as outlined below upon
completion and final stabilization of the project site:
E. During the first six months of operation of the facility the stormwater management
system shall be inspected a minimum of once per month and after every
rainstorm (defined in Part 1 above). As warranted by these inspections
maintenance of the system shall be performed including, but not limited to the
following:
1. Visual inspection of the existing catch basins, existing drain manholes,
existing detention basin and existing parking areas to ensure that the system
is not backed up and is emptying properly.
2. Visual inspection of the berms and curbs within the parking areas and
access driveways to insure the proper flow of stormwater within the site.
F. After the six month time period above has elapsed, thorough investigations shall
be conducted two times a year. Maintenance requirements may be adjusted
based upon the results obtained from the first year of operation. As warranted by
these inspections maintenance of the system shall be performed including, but
not limited to the following:
1. The existing detention basin requires an annual inspection for necessary
maintenance (refer to attached plan). This consists of visually inspecting for
the accumulation of sediment or floating debris; obstructions at the basin
inlets and at the outlet control structure (existing). Remove sediments from
these locations. Sediment, which is removed, shall be legally disposed of.
The detention basin shall be monitored at several intervals during and after a
small and large rainfall event to ensure the basins is functional.
2. The existing paved parking areas and access driveways will be swept after
the end of snow plowing/collection period. Typically during the end of April to
the beginning of May. The parking areas will be swept mechanically and all
sediment collected will be disposed of off-site at an appropriate facility.
3. Catch basins will be inspected during this same time period. Accumulated
sediment shall be removed from the catchbasins by means of vacuum truck
or clam shell device if the sediment depth is greater than 6".
4. The detention basin requires an annual inspection for necessary main-
tenance. This consists of visually inspecting the basin for the accumulation
of sediment, obstructions to the inlets or outlets, erosion and tree and/or
shrub growth. In addition, fallen trees and/or shrubs or tree branches will
removed and disposed of as soon as is practicable to insure proper basin
function.
5. Berms and curbs will be examined at the end of snow plowing/collection for
Page - 5 -
damage. All damaged concrete curbing will be replaced with like materials
as soon as is practicable. All damaged asphalt berms will saw cut and
removed and replaced with similar materials to match the existing
surface as soon as is practicable but no later than August 1. Removed
materials shall be disposed of at an appropriate location off site.
6. Twice yearly the project site will be inspected for invasive vegetation.
Visual inspections of the project site by a qualified arborist or horticulturist
will identify nuisance or invasive vegetation. Particular care will be given to
the existing detention basin vegetation. The inspections will take place
during the growing season during the late spring/early summer months of
May or June and again in the mid to late autumn months of October or
November. The vegetation will be removed and disposed of in a manner
that does not allow for the spread of plant materials or seedlings at an
appropriate location. Plant materials identified by the USDA, PLANTS
website or similar glossary will be removed and disposed of.
MAINTENANCE LOGS
Maintain a log of all operation and maintenance activities including without limitation
inspections, repairs, replacement and disposal (for disposal, the log shall indicate the
type of material and disposal location). Inspection forms are provided below for the
stormwater management system structures. A copy of the yearly maintenance logs shall
be made accessible to the following agencies:
Town of Hopkinton
Conservation Commission
18 Main Street
Hopkinton, MA 01748
Department of Environmental Protection
Central Regional Office
8 New Bond Street
Worcester, MA 01608
Standard Guidelines
Pesticides and/or herbicides of any type shall not be used for the establishment or
maintenance of turf grass associated with the project site and stormwater best
management practice structures. Use of fertilizers shall be limited to no- or low-
phosphorus, organic-based, slow release fertilizers. A maximum application rate
of 2 pounds of Nitrogen (N) per 1000 square feet of turf per year.
Use of sodium chloride de-icing compounds shall be minimized throughout the
project site wherever and whenever safety conditions allow. Use of sodium
chloride substitutes, particularly those that do not include chloride, is encouraged.
Page - 6 -
The owner shall submit annual reports to the Conservation Commission providing
a summary of the maintenance of the stormwater management system conducted
each year. Report shall be submitted on or before 1 November of each year. Said
reports shall include receipts from engineering consultants and maintenance
companies, etc. as evidence that the required maintenance work was conducted.
If, during the regular inspection of the infiltration basins providing groundwater
recharge, there is an observable decrease in infiltration, the infiltration basins shall
be refurbished to provide the level of groundwater recharge initially proposed in the
stormwater management recharge calculations. Evidence of the problem and its
repair shall be reported to the Commission.
All snow shall be plowed off the parking areas and driveways and will be stored in
sites highlighted on project designs.
A plan showing the location of the systems and facilities including all structural and
nonstructural BMP's is attached.
An estimated operations and maintenance budget. (Approximately $2,000 per
year)
Page - 7 -
CATCH BASIN INSPECTION FORM
Hopkinton Innovation Park
97 South Street
Hopkinton, MA
Owner:
Property Manager:
Inspected By:
Date of Inspection:
Catch Basins Inspected (describe location):
Acceptable Needs Work
Add notes below if structures need work:
Date of cleaning: By Whom:
Date of repair: By Whom:
Below note any further actions that need to be taken as necessary:
Page - 8 -
DRAIN MANHOLE INSPECTION FORM
Hopkinton Innovation Park
97 South Street
Hopkinton, MA
Owner:
Property Manager:
Inspected By:
Date of Inspection:
Grass Channel Inspected (describe location):
Acceptable Needs Work
Add notes below if structures need work:
Date of cleaning: By Whom:
Date of repair: By Whom:
Below note any further actions that need to be taken as necessary:
Page - 9 -
DETENTION BASIN INSPECTION FORM
Hopkinton Innovation Park
97 South Street
Hopkinton, MA
Owner:
Property Manager:
Inspected By:
Date of Inspection:
Basin Inspected (describe location):
Acceptable Needs Work
Add notes below if structure needs work:
Date of cleaning: By Whom:
Date of repair: By Whom:
Below note any further actions that need to be taken as necessary:
7/26/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - 97, 99 South St. (Hopkinton Innovation Park) - Site Plan Review Application - Harold Nahigian, Southfield …
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1640067362456913512&simpl=msg-f%3A16400673624…1/1
John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
97, 99 South St. (Hopkinton Innovation Park) - Site Plan Review Application - Harold
Nahigian, Southfield Properties I, LLC
John Westerling <jwesterling@hopkintonma.gov>Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 5:27 PM
To: Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>
Cc: Mike Mansir <mikemansir@hopkintonma.gov>, Eric Carty <ericc@hopkintonma.gov>, Shaun McAuliffe
<smcauliffe@hopkintonma.gov>, Don MacAdam <dmacadam@hopkintonma.gov>, Edward Lee <elee@hopkintonpd.org>,
Steve Slaman <sslaman@hopkintonfd.org>, Chuck Kadlik <chuckk@hopkintonma.gov>, Judi Regan
<judir@hopkintonma.gov>, Mary Carver <marycarver@hopkintonfd.org>, Anne-Marie Condon <acondon@hopkintonpd.org>,
John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
Cobi
The DPW has no comment on the application.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
John K. Westerling, MPA
Director of Public Works, Hopkinton DPW
Past-President, New England American Public Works Association
83 Wood Street
PO Box 209
Hopkinton, MA 01748
Email: jwesterling@hopkintonma.gov
Phone: 508-497-9740
Fax: 508-497-9761
[Quoted text hidden]
IMG-8957.JPG
102K
9/5/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Maspenock Woods
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1643852044286628485&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A1643…1/3
John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
Maspenock Woods
Peter Barbieri <pbarbieri@fletchertilton.com>Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 12:04 PM
To: John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
Yes continue
From: John Gelcich [mailto:jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov]
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2019 11:59 AM
To: Peter Barbieri <pbarbieri@fletchertilton.com>
Subject: Re: Maspenock Woods
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL
Should we plan on at least continuing without discussion at the 9/9 meeting or do you think you will
have a plan for withdrawal by Monday?
John
John Gelcich, AICP
Principal Planner
Town of Hopkinton
(508) 497-9745
jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov
On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 11:48 AM Peter Barbieri <pbarbieri@fletchertilton.com> wrote:
We met with the Con. Comm. and got some guidance. My client and the engineers were to me to come up with a new
layout but I have not heard back. Let me check on it and even if it makes more sense to withdrawal from the planning
board until we have a better sense of the Con. Comm. as I have no idea on the timing for that.
From: John Gelcich [mailto:jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov]
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2019 11:45 AM
To: Peter Barbieri <pbarbieri@fletchertilton.com>
Subject: Maspenock Woods
9/5/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Maspenock Woods
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1643852044286628485&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A1643…2/3
CAUTION: EXTERNAL EMAIL
Peter -
Is there going to be new information available to the Planning Board on the Maspenock Woods
project? It is on the agenda for the upcoming meeting, but no new material has been received
and the Board is looking to continue if there is no new information to deliberate.
The point may be moot as new information was to be received by this past Tuesday, however, I
wanted to touch base with you and see where you stand with the project.
John
John Gelcich, AICP
Principal Planner
Town of Hopkinton
(508) 497-9745
jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov
All email messages and attached content sent from and to this email account are public records unless qualified as
an exemption under the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
Visit us online at www.hopkintonma.gov.
To the extent that this communication contains any federal tax-related advice, please be advised that such advice is
not intended to be used, and may not be used, for the purpose of: (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal
Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matter(s) addressed
herein. This e-mail message is generated from the law firm of Fletcher Tilton PC, and may contain information that is
confidential and may be privileged as an attorney/client communication or as attorney work product. The information is
intended to be disclosed solely to the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
distribution or use of the contents of this e-mail information is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete it from your computer system.
9/5/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Maspenock Woods
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1643852044286628485&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A1643…3/3
All email messages and attached content sent from and to this email account are public records unless qualified as an
exemption under the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
Visit us online at www.hopkintonma.gov.
BETA GROUP, INC.
315 Norwood Park South, 2nd Floor, Norwood, MA 02062
P:781.255.1982 | F:781.255.1974 | W:www.BETA-Inc.com
July 8, 2019
John Gelcich, Principal Planner
Hopkinton Planning Board
18 Main Street, 3rd Floor
Hopkinton, MA 01748
Re: Hopkinton – Eversource Transfer Line Stormwater Peer Review
Dear Mr. Gelcich:
BETA Group, Inc. reviewed submitted documents for the Stormwater Management Permit for the
proposed Eversource Transfer Line Project Stormwater Management Permit on Eversource’s existing
transfer line easement connecting the communities of Hopkinton and Ashland, MA. This letter is
provided to outline BETA’s findings and recommendations.
BASIS OF REVIEW
BETA received the following documents:
·Approved Plans (25 sheets) entitled Eversource Energy Hopkinton – Ashland Transfer Line
Replacement Project Towns of Hopkinton & Ashland Middlesex County, Massachusetts dated
March 18, 2019 prepared by Tri – Mont Engineering Co., Plymouth, MA.
·Application for Stormwater Management Permit and Earth Removal Permit dated June 3, 2019
prepared by TRC Environmental Corporation, Scarborough, ME.
Review by BETA will include the above items along with the following, as applicable:
·Town of Hopkinton Zoning Bylaws revised to May 6, 2014
·Town of Hopkinton Massachusetts Zoning Map dated May 7, 2012
·Water Resource Protection Overlay District (Map)Hopkinton, MA March 2011
·Town of Hopkinton Chapter 172 Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Bylaw
·Town of Hopkinton Stormwater Management Regulations, amended August 11, 2014
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The 148,104± square foot project parcel is located on Eversource’s existing transfer line easement
connecting Hopkinton and Ashland, Massachusetts. The project involves replacing approximately 3.71
miles (1.1 miles in Hopkinton) of buried 6 inch diameter steel natural gas pipe with 12 inch diameter
steel natural gas pipe. The existing transfer line traverses woodlands, residential areas, and open water.
The subject property is located within the Residential, Agriculture, and Professional Office Zoning
Districts of Hopkinton, MA. Low Impact Development techniques, such as minimizing disturbances to
existing trees and shrubs, were considered during the planning and design of this project
The site is not located within a critical area (MassDEP Approved Zone II), however is located in multiple
wetlands and Order of Conditions was issued by the Hopkinton Conservation Commission in April 2019.
MassDEP Priority Resource Map indicates the project is not located with NHESP estimated habitats of
rare wildlife or rare species. The site is not located within the 100 year FEMA mapped flood zone (Zone
A).
Mr. John Gelcich, Principal Planner
July 8, 2019
Page 2 of 4
The project includes the excavation of a pipeline trench within the Company’s existing permanent
easement. The Company’s easement will be restored to original grade and contours at the end of
construction period.
REQUESTED WAIVERS REVIEW
The Applicant is not seeking any waivers from the Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Bylaw.
EARTH REMOVAL
The project requires earth removal. In order to maintain existing elevations and limit impacts associated
with grading, earth will need to be removed. The volume of earth removed approximately equals the
volume of the new pipe and sand bedding. BETA calculates the minimum volume to be removed in
accordance with the typical trench detail will be 1,300± cu. yds. Documentation indicates that access will
be at locations where the easement crosses public streets.
E1.Provide a plan outlining anticipated truck routes.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
The proposed project includes the excavation of a pipeline trench within the company’s existing
permanent easement located in the Town of Hopkinton. The project does not include additional
impervious areas and documents indicate that all disturbed areas will be restored to the existing
condition. If these two conditions are fulfilled there will be no permanent change in runoff and drainage
patterns as a result of this project.
MASSACHUSETTS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STANDARDS:
The project is subject to the Stormwater Management Standards (Stormwater Regulations (SWR) 7.0).
The following are the 10 standards and relative compliance provided by the submitted documentation.
No untreated stormwater (Standard Number 1): No new stormwater conveyances (e.g., outfalls) may
discharge untreated stormwater directly to or cause erosion in wetlands or waters of the
Commonwealth.The proposed project does not include new untreated outfall to wetland resource
areas. The existing drainage patterns are maintained to the maximum extent practicable –complies
with standard.
Post-development peak discharge rates (Standard Number 2): Stormwater management systems must
be designed so that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development peak
discharge rates.The project does not propose an increase in impervious area and will not have any
permanent impacts on the peak rate of runoff –complies with standard.
Recharge to groundwater (Standard Number 3): Loss of annual recharge to groundwater should be
minimized through the use of infiltration measures to maximum extent practicable.Project
documentation states “The proposed project does not design for any new impervious surfaces;
therefore, no recharge is required.”
80% TSS Removal (Standard Number 4):For new development, stormwater management systems must
be designed to remove 80% of the annual load of Total Suspended Solids.Project documentation states
“The proposed project does not design for any new impervious surfaces; therefore, no water quality
treatment is required.”
Mr. John Gelcich, Principal Planner
July 8, 2019
Page 3 of 4
Higher Potential Pollutant Loads (Standard Number 5): Stormwater discharges from Land Uses with
Higher Potential Pollutant Loads require the use of specific stormwater management BMPs.The project
is not considered a LUHPPL –standard not applicable.
Critical Areas (Standard Number 6): Stormwater discharges to critical areas must utilize certain
stormwater management BMPs approved for critical areas.The proposed project does not discharge
stormwater to critical areas –standard not applicable.
Redevelopment (Standard Number 7): Redevelopment of previously developed sites must meet the
Stormwater Management Standards to the maximum extent practicable.The proposed project includes
pipeline replacement. Provided all comments, herein, are addressed the project will meet this standard.
Construction Period Erosion and Sediment Controls (Standard Number 8):Erosion and sediment
controls must be implemented to prevent impacts during construction or land disturbance activities.The
project will disturb land in a long linear site crossing wetland resource areas private properties and
roadways. The project includes detailed provisions to minimize temporary and along term impacts
including significant erosion and sediment controls including:
·Stone trench pads
·Sediment control barriers
·Mulching
·Diversions
·Seeding and mulching
·Slope stabilization
·Trench breakers
·Dewatering
·Equipment refueling and spills
·Hazardous waste handling & disposal
·Dust control
·Remove erosion control devices
SW1.BETA recommends a condition that requires the submission of the signed SWPPP prior to
commencement of construction.
SW2.BETA recommends a condition that requires the submission of SWPPP inspection reports to the
Planning Board.
SW3.Documents submitted indicate that the contactor is responsible to
a.Provide restoration inspection reports to the Planning Board until site is stabilized.
b.Notify the Planning Board when the site is stabilized.
BETA recommends these be included as conditions.
Operations/maintenance plan (Standard Number 9): A long-Term Operation and Maintenance Plan
shall be developed and implemented to ensure that stormwater management systems function as
designed.Since no imperious areas are to be created and disturbed areas will be restored no
stormwater management structures or best management practices are proposed. Therefore no long-
term Operation and Maintenance Plan is provided or is necessary –standard not applicable.
Illicit Discharges (Standard Number 10): All illicit discharges to the stormwater management systems
are prohibited.No Illicit Discharge Statement is provided.
SW4.Provide a signed statement prior to construction.
Mr. John Gelcich, Principal Planner
July 8, 2019
Page 4 of 4
WETLANDS
The project has received an Order of Condition (OOC) from the Hopkinton Conservation Commission
with several conditions.
If we can be of any further assistance regarding this matter, please contact us at our office.
Very truly yours,
BETA Group, Inc.
Anthony Lupo Philip F Paradis, Jr., PE
Staff Engineer Associate
O:\6600s\6675 - Hopkinton - Eversource Transfer Line\Engineering\Reports\Eversource Transfer Line - Stormwater Review 7-8-19.docx
Town of Hopkinton Board of Health
18 Main St, Hopkinton, MA 01748
508497-9725
DATE: July 11,2019
TO: John Gelcich, Principal Planner,
Land Use, Planning & Permit Department
FROM: Shaun McAuliffe, Health Director
RE: Storm Water & Earth Removal Plan Review Comments,
Eversource Energy-Transfer Line Pipeline Easement
Wilson Street, Hopkinton, MA
The Health Director has reviewed the Permit Application. Based on a review of the
plans presented, the Director provides the following comments and conditions:
.. During permitted activity at the site, sanitary facilities must be provided, in
adequate number and with proper frequency of service to address the sanitary
and hygienic needs of the workforce. Permit for portable toilets may be
obtained from the Health Department.
.. Portable toilets must be serviced by a waste hauler permitted by the Town of
Hopkinton.
.. To remove the oil and/or hazardous waste and waste residues contained in the
pipeline scheduled for abandonment, the pipeline must be pumped and flushed
prior to abandonment.
.. Soils and/or surface materials impacted during pumping and flushing must be
securely stockpiled until they can be removed for permitted disposal.
.. The wastes, waste liquids and contaminated soils generated during the
pumpline abandonment must be contained, manifested and transported for
offsite disposal in accordance with appropriate local, State and Federal
regulations.
.. To limit nuisance dust and noise, adequate control measures must be
implemented and maintained throughout the duration of the project.
1
Town of Hopkinton Board of Health
18 Main St, Hopkinton, MA 01748
508497-9725
• Work activities must be completed in accordance with the Town of Hopkinton
Bylaw requirements for earth removal, use of construction equipment and
construction waste or debris.
Work activities must be completed in accordance with the permit documents provided
for review.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on this Stormwater and Earth Removal Plan.
Copy: File
Matthew Waldrip-Eversource Energy, 247 Station Drive, SE 2122, Westwood,
MA 02090; Brendan Kearns, TRI-MONT Engineering Co., 265 Aviation Ave,
Suite 212, South Burlington, VT 05403
2
6/17/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Re: Planning Board - Stormwater Management & Earth Removal Permit Applications - Hopkinton to Ashlan…
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6d686bf915&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a%3Ar7073690194484208604%7Cmsg-f%3A1636595622198…1/2
Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>
Re: Planning Board - Stormwater Management & Earth Removal Permit Applications
- Hopkinton to Ashland Transfer Line Replacement Project - Eversource Energy
1 message
John Westerling <jwesterling@hopkintonma.gov>Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 9:46 AM
To: Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>
Cc: Eric Carty <ericc@hopkintonma.gov>, Mike Mansir <mikemansir@hopkintonma.gov>, Judi Regan
<judir@hopkintonma.gov>, John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>, Maria Pittman <mglynn@hopkintonma.gov>
Cobi
Will the Planning Board's engineer be reviewing this application?
My only comment is for Eversource to alert the abutters of the proposed work.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
John K. Westerling, MPA
Director of Public Works, Hopkinton DPW
Past-President, New England American Public Works Association
83 Wood Street
PO Box 209
Hopkinton, MA 01748
Email: jwesterling@hopkintonma.gov
Phone: 508-497-9740
Fax: 508-497-9761
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 1:37 PM Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov> wrote:
John, Eric, Mike:
Attached are copies of the combined tormwater management and earth removal permit applications submitted to the
Planning board on 6/6/2019 by Eversource Energy in connection with the Hopkinton to Ashland Transfer Line
Replacement Project. The Planning Board has scheduled the public hearings on July 22. Please submit any
comments no later than July 16, 2019.
Hard copies of the above have been left in the DPW mailbox at Town Hall.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Cobi
Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant
DLUPP
Town of Hopkinton
Town Hall
18 Main St.
Hopkinton, MA 01748
Phone 508-497-9745
6/17/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Re: Planning Board - Stormwater Management & Earth Removal Permit Applications - Hopkinton to Ashlan…
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6d686bf915&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a%3Ar7073690194484208604%7Cmsg-f%3A1636595622198…2/2
All email messages and attached content sent from and to this email account are public records unless qualified as
an exemption under the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
Visit us online at www.hopkintonma.gov.
All email messages and attached content sent from and to this email account are public records unless qualified as an
exemption under the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
Visit us online at www.hopkintonma.gov.
IMG-8957.JPG
102K
7/16/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Planning Board - Stormwater Management & Earth Removal Permit Applications - Hopkinton to Ashland Tr…
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1639168025674138309&simpl=msg-f%3A16391680256…1/3
John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
Planning Board - Stormwater Management & Earth Removal Permit Applications -
Hopkinton to Ashland Transfer Line Replacement Project - Eversource Energy
Rebekah Lacey <rlacey@miyares-harrington.com>Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 7:14 PM
To: John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>, Elaine Lazarus <elainel@hopkintonma.gov>, Cobi Wallace
<cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>
Cc: John Westerling <jwesterling@hopkintonma.gov>, Norman Khumalo <nkhumalo@hopkintonma.gov>, Ray Miyares
<ray@miyares-harrington.com>
John G., Elaine, and Cobi:
Below are Town Counsel’s comments on Eversource’s Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Earth Removal Permit and
Stormwater Management Permit applications. For the convenience of folks copied, I’m attaching three documents
referenced in the comments: the Earth Removal and SWM Permits for the liquefaction facility, and BETA’s peer review of
the Transfer Line ER and SWMP applications.
Earth Removal Permit Application
1. Section 96-5(3) of the Earth Removal Bylaw states that “[a]n applicant shall submit adequate evidence of
ownership or authority to seek the permit.” No copy of, or Book and Page reference for, Eversource’s easement was
provided in the application. An online article refers to an “order-of-taking document made by Northeastern
Transmission Gas Co. in 1951,” but we could not locate the document via the Registry of Deeds online search
function. Eversource should provide the relevant document(s) so that the extent of its property rights can be
understood.
2. Eversource needs (but did not request) a waiver of the requirements at §96-3.E (depth to groundwater) and H
(100-foot buffer strip).
3. Eversource states in Section 1.0 of the application narrative, “Although the exact volume of off-site soil disposal is
not known at this time, it is anticipated to be below the 500 cubic yard threshold for Surplus Earth at §96-4(A.)(3)
of the Town of Hopkinton’s Earth Removal Bylaw.” However, BETA’s peer review estimates that the project will
generate approximately 1300 cubic yards of surplus earth. Eversource should provide more detailed information
about the generation and disposal of surplus earth.
4. The Planning Board should consider whether “retiring” the existing pipe in place (as proposed in Eversource’s
application) is acceptable.
5. Eversource provided minimal information about traffic control and roadway excavation safety measures, necessary
for the Planning Board to evaluate the permit criterion at §96-6.B(2)(d) (“The earth removal activity will not result
in traffic conditions on roads in the area of the earth removal activity which will cause unsafe and dangerous
conditions.”). We recommend that the Planning Board require that Eversource submit a Traffic Management Plan
and a Street Opening Plan and make approval of those plans by the relevant Town authorities and compliance with
the approved plans a condition of the permit.
6. In addition to the above, we recommend that the Planning Board include all of the conditions included in the
liquefaction facility ERP (modified as appropriate to this permit).
Stormwater Management Permit Application
1. We agree with the recommendations made in BETA’s peer review.
2. We recommend that conditions similar to the ones included in the liquefaction facility SWMP be included in this
permit.
3. We suggest that the Planning Board require Eversource to pay for a consultant to work on behalf of the Town
performing site inspections and monitoring compliance with the permit, as provided for in Section 6.C.2 of the
7/16/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Planning Board - Stormwater Management & Earth Removal Permit Applications - Hopkinton to Ashland Tr…
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1639168025674138309&simpl=msg-f%3A16391680256…2/3
Hopkinton Stormwater Regulations.
Regards,
Rebekah
Rebekah Lacey
MiyaresHarrington - Local options at work
Miyares and Harrington LLP
40 Grove Street • Suite 190
Wellesley, MA 02482
Direct: 617.804.2425 | Main: 617.489.1600
rlacey@miyares-harrington.com
www.miyares-harrington.com
This e-mail and any attachments may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that any
review, disclosure, distribution, use or duplication of this message and its attachments is prohibited. Please notify the sender
immediately if you have received this e-mail in error. Thank you for your cooperation.
From: Ray Miyares <ray@miyares-harrington.com>
Date: Monday, June 17, 2019 at 1:39 PM
To: Rebekah Lacey <rlacey@miyares-harrington.com>
Subject: FW: Planning Board - Stormwater Management & Earth Removal Permit Applications -
Hopkinton to Ashland Transfer Line Replacement Project - Eversource Energy
From: John Westerling <jwesterling@hopkintonma.gov>
Date: Monday, June 17, 2019 at 11:03 AM
To: "J. Miyares" <ray@miyares-harrington.com>
Cc: Norman Khumalo <nkhumalo@hopkintonma.gov>
Subject: Fwd: Planning Board - Stormwater Management & Earth Removal Permit Applications -
Hopkinton to Ashland Transfer Line Replacement Project - Eversource Energy
Here you go! Welcome to “the Loop”!
7/16/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Planning Board - Stormwater Management & Earth Removal Permit Applications - Hopkinton to Ashland Tr…
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1639168025674138309&simpl=msg-f%3A16391680256…3/3
[Quoted text hidden]
--
Thank you.
Sincerely,
John K. Westerling
Hopkinton's Director of Public Works
83 Wood Street
Hopkinton, MA 01748
508-497-9740
[Quoted text hidden]
3 attachments
Wilson St. 52 & 55 - Earth Removal Decision - LNG Liquefaction Facility - Signed.docx
72K
Wilson St. 52 & 55 - Eversource Energy - SMP 2019-01 Signed[1].docx
76K
BETA Group, HPB Stormwater Review, 07-08-19.pdf
93K
Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Replacement Project
Town of Hopkinton Planning Board Hearing
Stormwater Management & Earth Removal Permits
Meeting Date –July 22, 2019
2
Project Location
Hopkinton
Project Location
Project Overview
PURPOSE AND NEED
•The Project will continue the replacement of the section of 6-inch diameter steel
natural gas pipe with 12-inch diameter steel natural gas pipe.
•It will eliminate an existing pressure drop and improve performance, reliability and
integrity of the Framingham and Ashland natural gas distribution systems.
•The Project will also allow Eversource to meet anticipated, future load growth in
the greater Framingham area.
PROPOSED PROJECT FACILITIES
•Replace approximately 3.71 miles of existing 6-inch-diameter pipeline with 12-
inch-diameter pipeline within existing 20-30 foot wide permanent easement.
•Replacement work will occur in five (5) sections over the course of five years.
•The existing 6-inch diameter pipe in that section will then be taken out of service.
•Maximum operating pressure = 450 pounds per square inch gauge (PSIG)
•Maximum allowable operating pressure = 800 PSIG (will not change following
construction)
•Target In-Service Date = November 2024 (Full)
Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Replacement Project
Project Facilities
Project Scope in Hopkinton:
•Replace approximately 1.2 miles of existing buried 6-inch
diameter pipeline with 12-inch diameter pipeline in Hopkinton
•Trench depth 4 feet, trench width 2.5 feet.
•3 feet minimum backfill cover over pipe.
•Work within existing pipeline easement (20 –30 feet wide).
•No new above-ground facilities proposed.
•2 roads crossed in Hopkinton –Legacy Farms Road North and
Cross Street. (12-inch diameter pipe already installed across
Legacy Farms Road North).
•10 landowners crossed by the replacement pipeline easement in
Hopkinton.
Project Overview in Hopkinton
Survey Status
•Meetings with Town of Hopkinton Officials (July 2017 and Jan.
2018) –Town Manager, Engineering, DPW, Police, Conservation
•Meetings with Town of Ashland Officials
(July 2017 and Feb. 2018)
•Notification to affected and abutting landowners (multiple)
•Public informational meetings held in Hopkinton and Ashland
(Feb. 2018 and March 2018)
•Federal and State Agency meetings:
–U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Jan. 2018)
–Department of Conservation and Recreation (Nov. 2017)
–MEPA Office (Meeting with staff and Public Site Visit)
–MassDEP Central and Northeast Region Offices (Meeting with staff and site visit)
–Energy Facilities Siting Board (Site Visit, Public Hearing and Evidentiary Hearing)
Community/Public Outreach
Environmental Permits and Approvals
Energy Facilities Siting Board•Approval of Petition/Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (Ongoing)
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers•Section 404 Permit (issued)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency•NPDES Construction General Permit (to be filed prior to construction)
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service/ Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered
Species Program•Consultation (complete)
Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) Office•EENF and Single Environmental Impact Report (complete –Certificate issued)
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection •401 Water Quality Certification (review ongoing)
Hopkinton Conservation Commission•Wetlands Protection Act -Order of Conditions (complete)
Hopkinton Planning Board•Stormwater Management and Earth Removal Permits
•Scenic Road Permit
Hopkinton Permits and Approvals
Project Schedule
Milestones Target Dates
Receive All Final Agency Clearances/Permits Fall 2019
Construction Segment 1 (Hopkinton)May-Nov.2020
Construction Segment 2 (Hopkinton and Ashland)May-Nov.2021
Construction Segment 3 (Ashland)May-Nov.2022
Construction Segment 4 (Ashland)May-Nov.2023
Construction Segment 5 (Ashland) -In-Service (Full)May-Nov.2024
Project Schedule
Project FacilitiesProject Construction in Hopkinton
Le
g
a
c
y
F
a
r
m
s
R
o
a
d
-
No
r
t
h
Project FacilitiesConstruction Workspace Configuration
Project FacilitiesPipeline Trench Detail
Project FacilitiesEasement and Workspace in Hopkinton
Le
g
a
c
y
F
a
r
m
s
R
o
a
d
-
No
r
t
h
Transfer Line
Easement
Project FacilitiesExisting Transfer Line Easement
11
Project FacilitiesExisting Transfer Line Easement
11
Project FacilitiesEversource Transfer Line
Project FacilitiesExisting Transfer Line Easement
11
Project FacilitiesEversource Transfer Line
Project FacilitiesExisting Transfer Line Easement
11
Project FacilitiesEversource Transfer Line
Project FacilitiesExisting Transfer Line Easement
11
Project FacilitiesExisting Transfer Line Easement
11
Project FacilitiesEversource Transfer Line
Project FacilitiesExisting Transfer Line Easement
11
Project FacilitiesEversource Transfer Line
Project FacilitiesExisting Transfer Line Easement
11
Project FacilitiesErosion and Sediment BMPs
Project FacilitiesSummary of Review Comments
1.Evidence of easement ownership
2.Waiver request for depth to groundwater and buffer strip
3.Volume of soil disposal
4.Pipe retirement
5.Traffic management plan and street opening plan
6.LNG facility conditions
7.Funding for consultant
8.Sanitary facilities
9.Pipe pump and flush
10.Construction dust and noise
11.Truck routes
12.Submit signed SWPPP and provide inspection reports
August 30, 2019
John Gelcich, Principal Planner
Hopkinton Planning Board
Land Use, Planning and Permitting Department
18 Main Street, 3rd Floor
Hopkinton, MA 01748
Subject: Eversource Energy - Hopkinton to Ashland Transfer Line Replacement Project
Response to Review Comments
Stormwater Management and Earth Removal Permit Applications
Dear Mr. Gelcich:
TRC, on behalf of Eversource Energy, has prepared the following responses to the review comments
provided by the Town of Hopkinton Planning Board on the Application for a Stormwater Management
Permit and Earth Removal Permit. We are in receipt of comments from the Hopkinton Town Counsel,
Hopkinton Board of Health, and Beta Group, Inc. The following sections identify each comment and our
associated response.
Hopkinton Town Counsel Comments
The following section includes Eversource’s responses to the nine (9) Hopkinton Town Counsel
comments provided in an email from John Gelcich, Principal Planner to Matthew Waldrip, July 16, 2019.
Earth Removal Permit Application
1. Section 96-5(3) of the Earth Removal Bylaw states that “[a]n applicant shall submit adequate
evidence of ownership or authority to seek the permit.” No copy of, or Book and Page reference
for, Eversource’s easement was provided in the application. An online article refers to an “order-
of-taking document made by Northeastern Transmission Gas Co. in 1951,” but we could not locate
the document via the Registry of Deeds online search function. Eversource should provide the
relevant document(s) so that the extent of its property rights can be understood.
Response – The applicable deeds for the Eversource pipeline easement in the Town of Hopkinton
have been provided in Attachment A. These include the following:
• Book 7772/Page162, Northeastern Gas Transmission Company (7/13/1951);
• Book 8040/Page 587, Northeastern Gas Transmission Company (3/28/1951);
• Book 51234/Page 422, NSTAR Gas Company (5/27/2008); and
• Book 64862/Page 172, NSTAR Gas Company (1/29/2015).
Mr. John Gelcich, Principal Planner 2
Town of Hopkinton
2. Eversource needs (but did not request) a waiver of the requirements at §96-3.E (depth to
groundwater) and H (100-foot buffer strip).
Response – Eversource respectfully requests a waiver of the depth to groundwater requirement at
§96-3.E and the 100-foot buffer strip requirement at §96-3.H. The basis for these waiver requests is
provided below.
Depth to Groundwater
Section §96-3.E states that the depth of excavation for any earth removal operation shall not be
closer than seven feet above the spring high-water table, as determined by observation of soil
profiles or test wells. Given that the Project easement extends for approximately 1.2 miles through
the Town of Hopkinton in areas of variable topography and substrate conditions, groundwater levels
will fluctuate throughout the project area. Eversource requests a waiver because the proposed
trench excavation will temporarily expose shallow water table and will be backfilled immediately
following pipe installation with native soil material to restore the ground to pre-construction
condition.
Buffer Strip
Section §96-3.H states a buffer strip of undisturbed land not less than 100 feet wide shall be
maintained at all boundaries of the lot, including at all street lines, on which an earth removal
operation occurs. In the event that an earth removal permit is issued for adjoining lots under the
same ownership, the Board may waive the buffer strip requirement in such locations as it deems
appropriate. The Project involves construction within an existing utility easement, which crosses
multiple properties in Hopkinton over its 1.2-mile length. The Transfer Line easement is currently
maintained in a non-forested condition to facilitate pipe inspections and other operation needs.
Accordingly, buffer strips are not present within the easement at property boundaries and are not
consistent with the continued operation and maintenance of the Transfer Line. That said, the Project
will temporarily disturb soils and vegetation within the easement during construction, but once
restoration is complete, vegetation will be allowed to regrow in the easement.
3. Eversource states in Section 1.0 of the application narrative, “Although the exact volume of off-
site soil disposal is not known at this time, it is anticipated to be below the 500 cubic yard threshold
for Surplus Earth at §96-4(A.)(3) of the Town of Hopkinton’s Earth Removal Bylaw.” However,
BETA’s peer review estimates that the project will generate approximately 1300 cubic yards of
surplus earth. Eversource should provide more detailed information about the generation and
disposal of surplus earth.
Response – Eversource conservatively estimates a volume of approximately 1,000 cubic yards of
trench space that will be occupied by the proposed pipeline and sand bedding. However, in the
Company’s experience, this volume is often offset to a degree by the removal of rocks, boulders and
other materials deemed unsuitable for use as backfill in the trench. In the event excess soil is
Mr. John Gelcich, Principal Planner 3
Town of Hopkinton
generated during construction, it is Eversource’s plan to redistribute material near the trench area
where it was excavated. Excess soils will not be spread in wetland resource areas or buffer zones.
4. The Planning Board should consider whether “retiring” the existing pipe in place (as proposed in
Eversource’s application) is acceptable.
Response - Eversource proposes to retire the existing 6-inch diameter pipeline in place to minimize
impacts to property owners and environmental resources including wetlands, streams and wildlife
habitat. If the existing pipe is removed instead of retired in place, a second separate mobilization
will be required to excavate the 6-inch pipe once the proposed 12-inch diameter pipeline is installed
and put into service. This would essentially double the impacts to the aforementioned resources
and extend the duration of overall earth disturbance and construction activity. Within the context
of the natural gas industry, it has been and continues to be standard practice to retire pipe in the
ground when changing the size of or replacing an underground pipeline. Removing the existing pipe
would result in additional environmental impacts as part of the removal process and increase the
overall cost of the project to ratepayers, whereas the retired pipe does not have any adverse
environmental impact. When the new Transfer Line is installed, the existing Transfer Line would be
retired in place and only one pipeline would be left operational. For these reasons, Eversource does
not plan on removing the existing pipe after the new pipeline is commissioned.
To retire the existing 6-inch diameter pipeline, Eversource will first reduce the pressure in the existing
6-inch main down to approximately 60 psig, in order to reduce the amount of gas that must be
released to the atmosphere. A section of the 6-inch main will then be isolated on each end through
mechanical means and blown down to atmospheric pressure. The existing 6-inch pipe will then be
purged to remove any remaining gas. Once a section of pipe has been removed of all gas, it will be
cut and welded caps installed. Sections of the existing pipe that have been exposed to allow for the
retirement process, will be backfilled to the same standard as if it were a new installation. Once a
section of 6-inch steel pipe has been retired all gas will have been removed and the pipe will no
longer be in service.
5. Eversource provided minimal information about traffic control and roadway excavation safety
measures, necessary for the Planning Board to evaluate the permit criterion at §96-6.B(2)(d) (“The
earth removal activity will not result in traffic conditions on roads in the area of the earth removal
activity which will cause unsafe and dangerous conditions.”). We recommend that the Planning
Board require that Eversource submit a Traffic Management Plan and a Street Opening Plan and
make approval of those plans by the relevant Town authorities and compliance with the approved
plans a condition of the permit.
Response – Eversource will only need to construct across one road in Hopkinton (Cross Street).
Eversource will coordinate with the Town on a traffic management plan and street opening permit
prior to the start of construction.
Mr. John Gelcich, Principal Planner 4
Town of Hopkinton
6. In addition to the above, we recommend that the Planning Board include all of the conditions
included in the liquefaction facility ERP (modified as appropriate to this permit).
Response – In general, the conditions included in the Hopkinton LNG facility Earth Removal Permit
are acceptable to the Company.
Stormwater Management Permit Application
1. We agree with the recommendations made in BETA’s peer review.
Response – Eversource has addressed the Beta peer review comments in this letter.
2. We recommend that conditions similar to the ones included in the liquefaction facility SWMP be
included in this permit.
Response – In general, the conditions included in the Hopkinton LNG facility Stormwater
Management Permit are acceptable to the Company. However, the Company identified some
conditions in the LNG permit that don’t appear to be applicable to the proposed pipeline Project.
These include Conditions 1.C, 1.E., 1.F., 2.J, 8, and 10. We assume those conditions will not be
included in the permit issued for the Transfer Line Project.
3. We suggest that the Planning Board require Eversource to pay for a consultant to work on behalf
of the Town performing site inspections and monitoring compliance with the permit, as provided
for in Section 6.C.2 of the Hopkinton Stormwater Regulations.
Response – SWPPP inspections will be performed by TRC during construction at the frequency
required by the EPA Construction General Permit until the site has reached 70 percent stabilization.
Following construction, as required by state and federal permits, inspections would be performed
annually during the growing season and would continue until all disturbed areas within the easement
that were temporarily impacted by the Project meet the state and federal restoration criteria. The
Company agrees to fund an inspector/monitor for the Town but requests the parameters and scope
of the work (e.g., frequency, estimated cost, deliverables, etc.) be established and agreed upon prior
to the start of construction.
Hopkinton Board of Health
The following section includes Eversource’s responses to the Town of Hopkinton Board of Health review
comments (Email from Shaun McAuliffe, Health Director to John Gelcich, Principal Planner, July 11,
2019).
Mr. John Gelcich, Principal Planner 5
Town of Hopkinton
1. During permitted activity at the site, sanitary facilities must be provided, in adequate number and
with proper frequency of service to address the sanitary and hygienic needs of the workforce.
Permit for portable toilets may be obtained from the Health Department.
Response – An adequate number of temporary sanitary facilities will be provided during construction
by the contractor working for Eversource.
2. Portable toilets must be serviced by a waste hauler permitted by the Town of Hopkinton.
Response – Eversource’s contractor will select a Hopkinton-approved waste hauler to service the
temporary sanitary facilities.
3. To remove the oil and/or hazardous waste and waste residues contained in the pipeline scheduled
for abandonment, the pipeline must be pumped and flushed prior to abandonment.
Response – Eversource has not experienced oil and/or hazardous waste at the Wilson Street Gate
Station (where the existing Transfer Line begins in Hopkinton), within the Transfer Line, or at the
eastern end of the Transfer Line in Ashland. The Transfer Line is separated from the natural gas
transmission system (at the Wilson Street Gate Station) by an existing oil and water filter separator.
This separator is designed to remove any liquids and contaminants prior to entering the Transfer
Line. However, no contaminants have been observed at the Wilson Street location. Based on this, it
is the Company’s plan to cap the ends of the retired pipe sections and leave it in place without
pumping/flushing the line. This is considered standard industry practice for natural gas distribution
lines. If pumping and flushing the line was required, Eversource would need to truck water to the
site, mobilize pumping equipment, and set up fractionation tanks to hold the discharge water for off-
site disposal. These activities will generate additional noise, traffic and extend the duration of
construction for what the Company believes to be an unnecessary effort.
4. Soils and/or surface materials Impacted during pumping and flushing must be securely stockpiled
until they can be removed for permitted disposal
Response – See Response to #3 above.
5. The wastes, waste liquids and contaminated soils generated during the pipeline abandonment
must be contained, manifested and transported for offsite disposal in accordance with appropriate
local, State and Federal regulations.
Response – See Response to #3 above.
6. To limit nuisance dust and noise, adequate control measures must be implemented and
maintained throughout the duration of the project.
Mr. John Gelcich, Principal Planner 6
Town of Hopkinton
Response –
Dust Control
Construction activities may result in the temporary generation of fugitive dust due to disturbance of
the ground surface and other dust generating actions. Fugitive dust emissions from construction
activities will depend on such factors as the properties of the emitting surfaces (i.e., moisture content
and volume of spoils), meteorological variables, and construction practices employed. Although
fugitive dust may be generated during construction activities, the relatively small disturbance area
for this Project makes it unlikely that the migration of dust will cause off-site impacts. Furthermore,
soil excavation does not typically generate dust due to the natural moisture content of subsurface
soils. Nonetheless, the contractor will implement dust control measures as needed during active
construction that will primarily consist of street sweeping and using wetting agents to control and
suppress dust.
Specific dust control measures expected to be incorporated into the Project include:
• Mechanical street sweeping of construction areas and surrounding street and sidewalks as
needed;
• Removal of construction wastes in covered or enclosed trucks or trailers;
• Wetting exposed soils and stockpiles as needed to prevent dust generation; and
• Minimize duration of exposed soils.
The Company will require its contractors to follow these procedures.
Construction Noise
Construction noise, while varying according to equipment in use, will be mitigated by the attenuating
effect of distance and the intermittent and short-lived character of the noise. Further, the nature of
construction of a pipeline dictates that construction activities and associated noise levels will move
along the corridor and that no single location will be exposed to significant noise levels for an
extended period. Some discrete activities (e.g., pressure testing, tie-ins, purge and packing the
pipeline, etc.) may require 24-hour activity for limited periods of time (e.g., from one to three days).
However, these 24-hour activities would require only a few overnight construction personnel and
would not result in significant noise generation.
Noise mitigation measures expected to be incorporated into the Project include:
• Minimizing the amount of work conducted outside of typical construction hours;
• Ensuring that appropriate mufflers are installed and maintained on construction equipment;
Mr. John Gelcich, Principal Planner 7
Town of Hopkinton
• Ensuring appropriate maintenance and lubrication of construction equipment to provide the
quietest performance;
• Requiring muffling enclosures on continuously-operating equipment such as air compressors
and welding generators;
• Turning off construction equipment when not in use and minimizing idling times; and
• Mitigating the impact of noisy equipment on sensitive locations by using shielding or
buffering distance to the extent practical.
Blasting will not be conducted as part of this project due to the proximity to an active gas line, nor is
construction expected to result in noticeable vibrations.
Beta Group, Inc., July 8, 2019
Earth Removal
1. (E1.) Provide a plan outlining anticipated truck routes.
Response – A figure has been prepared showing potential truck routes to access the Eversource
pipeline easement during construction (see Attachment B).
Stormwater Management
1. (SW1.) BETA recommends a condition that requires the submission of the signed SWPPP prior to
commencement of construction.
Response – Eversource will prepare a stormwater pollution prevention plan in compliance with the
Environmental Protection Agency’s Construction General Permit. A copy of the signed SWPPP will
be submitted to the Town of Hopkinton prior to the start of construction.
2. (SW2.) BETA recommends a condition that requires the submission of SWPPP inspection reports
to the Planning Board.
Response – Eversource will provide copies of the SWPPP inspection reports to the Planning Board as
required by permits.
3. (SW3.) Documents submitted indicate that the contactor is responsible to:
a) Provide restoration inspection reports to the Planning Board until site is stabilized.
b) Notify the Planning Board when the site is stabilized.
BETA recommends these be included as conditions.
Mr. John Gelcich, Principal Planner 8
Town of Hopkinton
Response – Eversource will provide a restoration inspection report to the Planning Board and notify
the Planning Board when final stabilization has been achieved.
4. (SW4.) Provide a signed statement prior to construction.
Response – Standard 10 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Management Standards defines illicit
discharges to a stormwater management system as discharges that are not entirely comprised of
stormwater. Eversource hereby states that the proposed Project will not generate an illicit discharge
to a stormwater management system. A signed statement is provided in Attachment C.
With the submission of this information we respectfully request your continued review of the permit
applications. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (617)549-8506 or at
cduncan@trccompanies.com.
Best Regards, TRC Environmental
Colin P. Duncan Program Manager
cc: Matthew Waldrip, Eversource
Sean Berthiaume, Eversource
Rick Paquette, SWCA
ATTACHMENT A
Book 7772/Page 162
Northeastern Gas Transmission Company (7/13/1951)
Book 8040/Page 587
Northeastern Gas Transmission Company (3/28/1951)
Book 51234/Page 422
NSTAR Gas Company (5/27/2008)
Book 64862/Page 172
NSTAR Gas Company (1/29/2015)
ATTACHMENT B
HOPKINT
O
N
ASHLAN
D
C
R
O
S
S
S
T
R
E
E
T
FRANKLAND ROAD
L
E
G
A
C
Y
F
A
R
M
S
N
O
R
T
H
HOPKINTONTRANSFER LINE REPLACEMENT
Data Source: ESRI, MASSGIS, EversourceBase Map: ESRI OpenStreetMap
Pa
t
h
:
S
:
\
1
-
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
E
V
E
R
S
O
U
R
C
E
\
2
7
4
3
5
3
_
H
o
p
k
i
n
t
o
n
A
s
h
l
a
n
d
_
G
a
s
M
a
i
n
\
H
o
p
k
i
n
t
o
n
_
T
r
u
c
k
_
R
o
u
t
e
s
_
S
t
r
e
e
t
_
M
a
p
1
1
x
1
7
.
m
x
d
,
D
a
t
e
S
a
v
e
d
:
7
/
2
9
/
2
0
1
9
DATE: 7/29/2019
1 inch = 1,000 feet
EVERSOURCE EASEMENT
TOWN BOUNDARY
POTENTIAL TRUCK ROUTE 1
POTENTIAL TRUCK ROUTE 2 POTENTIAL TRUCK ROUTES
K
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
PROJECT LOCATION
ATTACHMENT C
Illicit Discharge Statement
To the best of my knowledge, the attached plans, computations and specifications meet the
requirements of Standard 10 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook regarding illicit
discharges to the stormwater management system and that no detectable illicit discharges exist
on the site.
Applicant Name
Eversource Energy
Address
247 Station Drive, SE 2122
Westwood, MA 02090
Telephone
781-441-8247
Contact
Matthew Waldrip
Senior Specialist – Environmental Licensing & Permitting
Signature
8/19/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Eversource LNG Safety Concerns
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=47ea419b37&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1642320491182369274&simpl=msg-f%3A16423204911…1/1
John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
Eversource LNG Safety Concerns
Brendan Tedstone <btedstone@hopkintonma.gov>Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 2:21 PM
To: John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>, Stephen Slaman <sslaman@hopkintonfd.org>
Hi John. I have a few concerns. Firstly, I think it’s paramount to have transparency between the facility and our
emergency management team. Secondly, there needs to be a way of instant notification upon finding an issue to that
emergency Management team to decide if it warrants notifying the public. The last “Thermal Anomaly” definitely caught
my attention as a taxpayer and as a Selectman. Other than that, I would defer to Chief Slaman to air our concerns. He’s
been around this facility for 40 years and is most capable as a leader, Chief, resident and taxpayer to ask the right
questions.
Sent from my wall mounted, rotary dialed telephone
[Quoted text hidden]
[Quoted text hidden]
All email messages and attached content sent from and to this email account are public records unless
qualified as an exemption under the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
Visit us online at www.hopkintonma.gov.
All email messages and attached content sent from and to this email account are public records unless qualified as an
exemption under the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
Visit us online at www.hopkintonma.gov.
TOWN OF HOPKINTON
OFFICE OF
THE PLANNING BOARD
TOWN HALL
18 MAIN STREET
HOPKINTON, MASS. 01748
(508) 497-9755
APPLICATION FOR A SCENIC ROAD PUBLIC HEARING
Ch. 160 of the Bylaws of the Town of Hopkinton, Scenic Roads
Date: _______________________________
Applicant: ____________________________________________________________________
Address: ______________________________________________________________________
Daytime Telephone: _________________________ Email: _____________________________
Address of Proposed Work: _______________________________________________________
Assessors Map: ________ Block: _________ Lot: _________
Describe the proposed work, including the species and diameter of each tree to be removed and
linear feet of stone wall to be removed/altered:________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Is a public hearing required under the provisions of the Public Shade Tree Law or Ch. 186,
Trees? Yes: ________________ No: ___________________
If yes, has the Tree Warden been notified: ______________________________
Has a hearing date been set? _________________________
Submission Requirements Checklist:
______ Plan (See Ch. 160)
______ Certified list of abutters within 100 feet of the proposed work, from Assessors Office
______ $50.00 filing fee
For Planning Department Use:
Submission Date: _________________________ Date of Legal Ads: ____________________
Date of Public Hearing Deadline: _____________ Decision Due: ________________________
Public Hearing Date: _______________________ Decision Date: _______________________
7-11-2019
Eversource Energy - Matthew Waldrip
247 Station Drive, SE 2122 Westwood, MA 02090
781-441-8247 matthew.waldrip@eversource.com
existing Transfer Line easement in Hopkinton
X
X
X
X
As part of the Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Replacement Project, Eversource is proposing to use
open trench construction methods to cross Cross Street. There is one stone wall that enters the existing
pipeline easement from the south and extends approximately 5-feet into the 20-foot wide easement. This
stone wall will be temporarily altered. Following the completion of construction, the stone wall will be
returned to pre-consturction conditions. No trees will be removed as a result of the project crossing Cross
Street.
see attached list
7/30/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Re: Scenic Road Application - Cross St. - Eversource Energy
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6d686bf915&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a%3Ar-1411962933189050291%7Cmsg-f%3A164042095770…1/2
Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>
Re: Scenic Road Application - Cross St. - Eversource Energy
1 message
John Westerling <jwesterling@hopkintonma.gov>Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 3:07 PM
To: Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>
Cc: Mike Mansir <mikemansir@hopkintonma.gov>, Eric Carty <ericc@hopkintonma.gov>, Maria Pittman
<mglynn@hopkintonma.gov>, Chuck Kadlik <chuckk@hopkintonma.gov>, Judi Regan <judir@hopkintonma.gov>, John
Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>
Cobi
The DPW has no comment on this application.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
John K. Westerling, MPA
Director of Public Works, Hopkinton DPW
Past-President, New England American Public Works Association
83 Wood Street
PO Box 209
Hopkinton, MA 01748
Email: jwesterling@hopkintonma.gov
Phone: 508-497-9740
Fax: 508-497-9761
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 2:54 PM Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov> wrote:
Attached please find a copy of the scenic road application submitted to the Planning Board on July 24, 2019 by
Eversource Energy for the temporary removal of approximately 5 ft. of stone wall along Cross St., about 450 ft. north of
the intersection with Frankland Rd., within the natural gas pipeline easement. The pipeline easement is 20 ft. wide in
that location.
The proposed work is related to the Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Replacement Project.
The public hearing will be held concurrently with the ongoing public hearings on the associated Stormwater
Management Permit and Earth Removal Permit applications continued to September 9, 2019.
Please submit any comments/recommendations to the Planning Board at Town Hall or via email to John Gelcich or me
no later than September 3.
A hard copy of this application will be left in your mailbox at Town Hall.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Cobi Wallace
DLUPP
Town of Hopkinton
Town Hall
18 Main St.
Hopkinton, MA 01748
7/30/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Re: Scenic Road Application - Cross St. - Eversource Energy
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6d686bf915&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a%3Ar-1411962933189050291%7Cmsg-f%3A164042095770…2/2
Phone 508-497-9745
All email messages and attached content sent from and to this email account are public records unless qualified as
an exemption under the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
Visit us online at www.hopkintonma.gov.
All email messages and attached content sent from and to this email account are public records unless qualified as an
exemption under the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
Visit us online at www.hopkintonma.gov.
IMG-8957.JPG
102K
9/3/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Re: Scenic Road Application - Cross St. Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Project - Eversource Energy
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6d686bf915&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a%3Ar-3709248113437167873%7Cmsg-f%3A164367138427…1/4
Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>
Re: Scenic Road Application - Cross St. Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Project -
Eversource Energy
1 message
Rebekah Lacey <rlacey@miyares-harrington.com>Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 12:12 PM
To: Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>, John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>, Elaine Lazarus
<elainel@hopkintonma.gov>
Cc: Ray Miyares <ray@miyares-harrington.com>
Cobi, John, and Elaine:
Our office has reviewed the Application for a Scenic Road Public Hearing submitted by Eversource Energy for work within
the Scenic Road Layout of Cross Street as part of the Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Replacement Project. We submit
the following comments for the Planning Board’s consideration:
1. The application does not clearly and specifically address the criteria set forth in Section 160-6 of the Hopkinton
Scenic Roads Bylaw. Each of these criteria should be addressed individually.
2. The application states that only “saplings” are present within the right-of-way, but it appears from the photos and
plan that that statement may not be accurate. The applicant should more specifically evaluate whether any trees
greater than 3 inches in diameter at breast height (per §160-1 of the Bylaw) are present within the right-of-way
within the Scenic Road Layout. If any are, the applicant should state whether any of these trees will be cut or
removed.
3. Since the stone wall extends only 5 feet into the southern portion of the right-of-way (according to the application
form), it is not clear why temporary removal of the wall is necessary, given that the new gas line will be installed in
the northern portion of the right-of-way.
4. The applicant should provide a copy of the archeological survey report described on page 4 of the application
narrative, as well as any responses received from tribal representatives and the Massachusetts Historical
Commission.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
Rebekah
Rebekah Lacey
9/3/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Re: Scenic Road Application - Cross St. Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Project - Eversource Energy
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6d686bf915&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a%3Ar-3709248113437167873%7Cmsg-f%3A164367138427…2/4
MiyaresHarrington - Local options at work
Miyares and Harrington LLP
40 Grove Street • Suite 190
Wellesley, MA 02482
Direct: 617.804.2425 | Main: 617.489.1600
rlacey@miyares-harrington.com
www.miyares-harrington.com
This e-mail and any attachments may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that any
review, disclosure, distribution, use or duplication of this message and its attachments is prohibited. Please notify the sender
immediately if you have received this e-mail in error. Thank you for your cooperation.
From: Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>
Date: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 at 9:44 AM
To: Rebekah Lacey <rlacey@miyares-harrington.com>
Cc: John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>, Elaine Lazarus <elainel@hopkintonma.gov>
Subject: Re: Scenic Road Application - Cross St. Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Project -
Eversource Energy
Hi Rebekah:
This application has been scheduled for September 9, and comments and/or recommendations will be appreciated no
later than September 3.
Regards,
Cobi Wallace
Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant
DLUPP
Town of Hopkinton
Town Hall
18 Main St.
Hopkinton, MA 01748
9/3/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Re: Scenic Road Application - Cross St. Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Project - Eversource Energy
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6d686bf915&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a%3Ar-3709248113437167873%7Cmsg-f%3A164367138427…3/4
Phone 508-497-9745
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 9:26 AM Rebekah Lacey <rlacey@miyares-harrington.com> wrote:
Thanks Cobi! What is the deadline for comments?
Rebekah
Rebekah Lacey
MiyaresHarrington - Local options at work
Miyares and Harrington LLP
40 Grove Street • Suite 190
Wellesley, MA 02482
Direct: 617.804.2425 | Main: 617.489.1600
rlacey@miyares-harrington.com
www.miyares-harrington.com
This e-mail and any attachments may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that any
review, disclosure, distribution, use or duplication of this message and its attachments is prohibited. Please notify the sender
immediately if you have received this e-mail in error. Thank you for your cooperation.
From: Cobi Wallace <cobiw@hopkintonma.gov>
Date: Monday, July 29, 2019 at 5:04 PM
To: Rebekah Lacey <rlacey@miyares-harrington.com>
Cc: John Gelcich <jgelcich@hopkintonma.gov>, Elaine Lazarus <elainel@hopkintonma.gov>
Subject: Scenic Road Application - Cross St. Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Project -
Eversource Energy
Hi Rebekah:
Attached for your information is a copy (application and supporting documentation) of the scenic road application
submitted to the Planning Board on July 24, 2019 by Eversource Energy, for temporary stone wall removal on Cross
Street within the natural gas pipeline easement. The application was initially submitted on July 11 but was not
complete until the actual application and valid abutters list was received on July 24.
9/3/2019 Town of Hopkinton, MA Mail - Re: Scenic Road Application - Cross St. Hopkinton-Ashland Transfer Line Project - Eversource Energy
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ik=6d686bf915&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a%3Ar-3709248113437167873%7Cmsg-f%3A164367138427…4/4
The public hearing has been scheduled for September 9, concurrently with the continued public hearings on the
associated Stormwater Management and Earth Removal Permit applications.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Regards,
Cobi Wallace
Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant
DLUPP
Town of Hopkinton
Town Hall
18 Main St.
Hopkinton, MA 01748
Phone 508-497-9745
All email messages and attached content sent from and to this email account are public records unless qualified as
an exemption under the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
Visit us online at www.hopkintonma.gov.
All email messages and attached content sent from and to this email account are public records unless qualified as an
exemption under the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
Visit us online at www.hopkintonma.gov.
McIntyre Engineering & Septic Services, Inc.
5 Whisper Way Hopkinton, MA 01748
508-497-2374
John Gelcich, Planner
Hopkinton Planning Board
Town Hall
18 Main Street
Hopkinton, MA 01748 August 5, 2019
Subject: Scenic Road Permit Application – 223 Pond Street
Dear Mr. Gelcich:
Enclosed please find the following information for a scenic road application involving a
temporary stone wall alteration at 223 Pond Street submitted on behalf of the owner.
• Permit Application
• Application fee ($50)
• Plan of work (3 copies)
• Certified list of abutters
• Photographs of site
The homeowners are in the process of replacing their failed cesspool with a Title 5
compliant septic system. The system has been designed and approved by the Board of
Health. The majority of the construction access will be from an existing driveway
opening off Pond Street. However, it is proposed to temporarily remove a portion of the
stone wall along Pond Street to install the septic and pump tank. The tank locations are
dictated by the house plumbing and are close to Pond Street. Access by the tank delivery
truck to this area from the lot side is not possible due to steep topography. Removal of
approximately 15 feet of wall would allow the delivery truck to back in from Pond Street
and set the tanks. There are no trees within the right of way in this area. The plants
along the wall would be saved for replanting. Two trees located on private property
would be removed and replaced. These trees had been previously damaged by storms
and were planned to be replaced by the homeowner. Upon completion of the septic
system, the stone wall would be rebuilt in kind and the ground disturbed by the truck
access would be replanted with the original plants. The septic construction is expected to
take 2 to 3 weeks.
Should you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me at (508) 497-2374.
Sincerely,
Daniel McIntyre, P.E.
cc: Christine & Andre Navez, homeowners
Town of Hopkinton, MA August 4, 2019
MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY
NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT
Town of Hopkinton, MA makes no claims and no warranties,
expressed or implied, concerning the validity or accuracy of
the GIS data presented on this map.
1" = 100 ft